[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ...
From: |
Ken Hornstein |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ... |
Date: |
Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:30:48 -0500 |
>One thing to keep in mind when thinking about that line is that inc is
>typically synchronous, where our use of fetchmail/procmail (or whatever)
>is asynchronous. By the time we step up to MH, everything is already in
>a folder or in the local maildrop ready for +inbox (or already in
>+inbox). I don't want to have to wait for inc to go to my remote server.
I just timed inc ... to go to my POP server, which included Kerberos
authentication (4 extra round trips), download a small test message
(session was encrypted), write it out (to a network filesystem, no less),
and exit, it took:
0.04 real 0.01 user 0.00 sys
Are you really THAT impatient, Bill? :-) Ok, fine ... going across the
global internet for all that will be a lot worse. But most of the time
I never notice it unless there's a problem.
-Ken
- [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Jeffrey Honig, 2013/01/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Ken Hornstein, 2013/01/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Ralph Corderoy, 2013/01/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Ken Hornstein, 2013/01/06
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Bill Wohler, 2013/01/08
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ...,
Ken Hornstein <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., chad, 2013/01/08
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Ken Hornstein, 2013/01/08
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Bill Wohler, 2013/01/20
- Re: [Nmh-workers] inc, slocal, procmail, ..., Valdis . Kletnieks, 2013/01/10