On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 12:03:55PM +0800, Adam Bradley wrote:
> Given I now know you can't achieve the approach above I'll pursue using a
> lookup table. However, with around 5 million users, address verification
> was looking like the best option.
No, a lookup table scales much better.
> My onl
On 6/14/2012 11:03 PM, Adam Bradley wrote:
>
> Sorry, but this sounds to me like an accident waiting to happen. I
> would /strongly/ recommend getting a proper recipient list and
> populating transport_maps with a user->host mapping.
>
>
>
> My only concern is scalability, is ther
On 06/15/2012 06:03 AM, Adam Bradley wrote:
>
> Sorry, but this sounds to me like an accident waiting to happen. I
> would /strongly/ recommend getting a proper recipient list and
> populating transport_maps with a user->host mapping.
>
>
>
> My only concern is scalability, is ther
Noel,
Inline.
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Noel Jones wrote:
> On 6/14/2012 8:38 PM, Adam Bradley wrote:
> > I have a situation where email delivered to a single namespace needs
> > to be delivered to a user who could be in one of a number of
> > downstream system (but we don't know which o
On 6/14/2012 8:38 PM, Adam Bradley wrote:
> I have a situation where email delivered to a single namespace needs
> to be delivered to a user who could be in one of a number of
> downstream system (but we don't know which one
that sounds... broken.
> I was wondering if
> I could use "Callback Veri
I have a situation where email delivered to a single namespace needs to be
delivered to a user who could be in one of a number of downstream system
(but we don't know which one). I was wondering if I could use "Callback
Verification" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Callback_verification to achieve
thi