Milter-greylist

reschauzier wrote:
 > Oliver Fromme wrote:
 > 
 > > I think there are other -- maybe better -- ways to improve
 > > scalability.  For example, when you've got 20 servers, then
 > > don't use all of them for the same set of domains.  Instead
 > > you should partition them into sets that create roughly
 > > the same load ("divide and conquer"), e.g. use 5 sets of
 > > 4 servers for different domains.  That will cut the MX sync
 > > traffic down by 75%.
 > 
 > This only works when serving multiple domains. As long as a single
 > domain can be handled by one or only a handful of mx servers, the
 > current milter-greylist solution is fine.
 > 
 > The focus here is what if we need a significant (>50) number of
 > servers to handle a single domain? A database backend, even with its
 > inherent overhead, then suddenly starts to make sense.

Are there any real-use cases for that many servers using
milter-greylist for a single domain?  I don't think that
something like that really exists.

Best regards
   Oliver

-- 
Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M.
Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606,  Gesch\ufffdftsfuehrung:
secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht M\ufffdn-
chen, HRB 125758,  Gesch\ufffdftsf\ufffdhrer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart

FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr:  http://www.secnetix.de/bsd

"anyone new to programming should be kept as far from C++ as
possible;  actually showing the stuff should be considered a
criminal offence" -- Jacek Generowicz