AW: Not completely OT: Does this affect MailScanner users on
Alex Neuman van der Hans
alex at rtpty.com
Sat Aug 30 16:31:50 IST 2008
I did a simple grep and found at least a dozen "blessings" IIRC ...
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 30, 2008, at 3:53 AM, "Glenn Steen" <glenn.steen at gmail.com>
> 2008/8/29 Richard Frovarp <richard.frovarp at sendit.nodak.edu>
> Ken A wrote:
> Richard Frovarp wrote:
> Alex Neuman van der Hans wrote:
> How much of an improvement? Can you describe both the test and the
> manual perl compile process and put it up on the wiki?
> The test doesn't use MailScanner. We have RHEL 4 and RHEL 5 boxes
> running MS. Doing the test RHEL 4 is fine, and RHEL5 isn't. However,
> we have not noticed any performance difference between the two
> releases when it comes to running MS.
> Same here, but with FC6 buggy perl. It would be nice to know if
> MailScanner is affected in any significant way. Why upgrade perl for
> new bugs when the old ones work fine?
> Well my testing and other testing reported back here, seems to
> indicate there isn't a problem. No one has said anything on the SA
> list. Run that test code and add an extra 0 onto the end. RHEL 4
> finished in about 4 seconds. RHEL 5 on a beefier box was only half
> done after 40 minutes and was slowing down. It would appear that
> when this one hits, it hits very hard.
> Well then. Are we to guess there is no use of bless/overload in the
> MS code and all it's depended upon modules? Seems unlikely, but
> perhaps true. I wonder if even Jules knows:).
> -- Glenn
> email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
> work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se
> MailScanner mailing list
> mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
> Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MailScanner