On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 08:39:19 -0800, Robert Spier wrote: > Now you've rung a bell. > > We've seen this problem with pperl too. It's one of the reasons we > switched to qpsmtpd-forkserver. > > The idea behind using DENYHARD was to get rid of the user as fast as > possible. Probably what you actually want is just 'DENY' -- but use > what works. > > -R (who needs to finish his customizable return codes thingy)
Whew, glad to know I'm not crazy ;) Has anyone done any testing with qpsmtpd-forkserver as far as performance goes? I looked at it a little bit last night but didn't see any documentation on how to use it or get everything going either. Thanks for the help. Ed McLain
