Bernd Fondermann wrote:
> my point was, maybe this is not a newly introduced bug... but
> validating this seems to be impossible since the mail server
> world changed so heavily, as you suggest.
It is quite possible that it is an old bug that is surfacing now because
other bugs got out of the way. There were old bugs that caused me to have
to cycle JAMES 2.2 on a daily basis to keep it from throwing OOM.
> but as I understand it, performance _is_ an issue regarding
> the growing traffic and recently surfacing spooling defects.
JAMES should be faster now than it was before. Some of the recent spooling
changes should have improved performance, and reduced load.
> That is why I think that "memory leak" is a delicate term.
> If what we currently have is "the best James ever", we should release
pronto.
Which is what I have been saying, and I specifically changed the issue
priority to reflect it. I've never considered this a blocking issue. That
was something that Norman put into JIRA when he created an issue for the
e-mail I had posted.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
