Another call for improvements

[Julian Field]

Christian Pedaschus wrote:
> 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.
>   
But you are already doing the call to syslog, so it doesn't cost any 
extra cycles at all.

-- 
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support

PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support.