Spot on Mark, sounds like I'll alarm Q-S, and add your kill suggestion -
that'll stop Q-S double-delivering if qmail-smtpd dies.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 03:48:50AM +0000, Mark Delany wrote:
> All you are really doing is reducing the window of risk to a very
> small - but non-zero - size. But non-zero is ok as SMTP is idempotent.
Yup - SMTP has always erred on the "duplicate-is-better-than-miss" side -
fair enough too...
Thanks for the ideas
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Unix/Special Projects, Trimble NZ
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
