Another call for improvements

[Christian Pedaschus]

Julian Field wrote:

> Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
>> Julian Field wrote on Wed, 31 May 2006 08:53:28 +0100:  
>>
>>> Please try the attached patch to MessageBatch.pm.  
>>> Sorry to the people who wanted this feature, there is a
>>> significant   vote (both on the list and to me) for not doing it.
>>> You will have to   switch on "Log Speed" to get it now.
>>>     
>>
>>
>> Hm, would it be possible to do something like sendmail has with "log
>> level" or other packages with "log verbosity"? Have something like a
>> log level of none - don't log anything
>> medium - log only that messages get processed or something like that,
>> but no details
>> full - log like it is now
>>   
>
> This is why I use syslog. You can configure different log levels with
> /etc/syslog.conf. If you just log warn and above, you will only get
> error messages and other warnings.
>
As this is my first mail to the list, first some gratitude: "3 server
and 50 workstations start singing a chorus using their busy drives,
praising the master of mailscanner for his great gift (in binary
morse-code) ;) "

Back to topic:
Isn't a call to syslog more cpu expensive than a 'if then' inside
mailscanner? I mean, it's surely not a big hit, but every cycle counts,
as the quantity matters.

Greets, Chris