Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 15:10:41 -0500 From: Doug Lee <dgl@dlee.org> To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is this a good time for a procmail global lock file? Message-ID: <20021123201040.GM55241@kirk.dlee.org> In-Reply-To: <20021123193700.GB4795@dan.emsphone.com> References: <20021123185018.GJ55241@kirk.dlee.org> <20021123193700.GB4795@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 01:37:00PM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote: > It's likely that procmail does not lock LOGFILE, and from looking at > the source it writes the abstract with a huge number of separate > write() calls. You're probably stuck with using a global lockfile, > which should force serial access to procmail. If you only have one > rule in your procmailrc, it's no worse than a local lockfile. If > you've got a bunch, you might need to log the abstracts manually with a > single write call (or rewrite procmail's logging functions). A call to > /usr/bin/printf with the appropriate format string should work. I have a bunch of rules, but with maybe 360 emails/day, it won't slow things down too much to force serial access... but could I create deadlocks this way by accident? I do not call procmail directly from a recipe, but I do have filter rules that pipe through other stuff. -- Doug Lee dgl@dlee.org http://www.dlee.org Bartimaeus Group doug@bartsite.com http://www.bartsite.com "Liberty comes in boxes: ballot, jury, and ammo." -Anonymous To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021123201040.GM55241>