[antispam-f] Re: Waiting for inbox
- From: Richard Porter <ricp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: antispam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:42:26 +0100
On 2 Jun 2010 Frank de Bruijn wrote:
> In article <b8cabf2051.ricp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Richard Porter <ricp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If you set "E-mails/bytes to process per run" and a Wait time in
>> Choices... > Mailbox > General, AntiSpam will stop after the required
>> number or volume of messages and wait for the specified time before
>> fetching the next lot. However it doesn't appear to close its output
>> file
> That's correct. The files aren't closed until handling of the current
> mailbox is finished.
>> so SpamStamp, Messenger, etc. can't get on with processing the
>> messages already received.
> You really need that there? The mailbox isn't 'done' yet at that point.
Not necessarily, or rather I don't really need the wait. The reason I
set the limit was to reduce the amount of mail which has to be
refetched if the transfer fails for some reason, which it did when I
returned from a short break. I had fetched 124 out of about 280
messages.
> I'll see if I can add some code to close the files prematurely without
> disrupting the program flow.
If there's a wait between fetches then it would seem sensible, but
otherwise I accept there's not a lot to be gained. On the other hand
if I can fetch 50 messages at a time and then wait for 30 seconds, I
could get on with reading those messages while the next batch was
being fetched.
--
Richard Porter http://www.minijem.plus.com/
mailto:ricp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Confidentiality statement: Imagine 50 lines of pointless verbiage.
Other related posts:
