Milter-greylist

Jim Carroll <jim@...> wrote:

> In the long run, perhaps the best approach is to refactor the code to use a
> char* for r_addr, and malloc() new entries based on the actual length of the
> address.

Yes, that should improve a lot the situation. 

Another trick would be to use the fact that the recipients are often the
same for the same server. We could have a dynamically allocated table of
recipients seen so far, and we could have pointers to the list,
therefore sharing memory for each message going to the same recipient.

Splitting recipient name and domain would help too, as the domains are
even more scarce for a given server.
 
> But as a quick hack, I'm considering just dropping ADDRLEN to 100. 
> Does anyone know whether this would break anything too severely?

You may burn yourself hot with unique addresses generated by some
software, otherwise it looks okay as an interm hack.

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
manu@...