Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!twg.com!david From: david@twg.com (David S. Herron) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: How efficient/fast is uucp? Message-ID: <7843@gollum.twg.com> Date: 27 Aug 90 00:49:58 GMT References: <8464@pitt.UUCP> <1556.26d282ea@dcs.simpact.com> <1990Aug25.193329.13643@m2xenix.psg.com> Reply-To: david@twg.com (David S. Herron) Organization: The Wollongong Group, Palo Alto, CA Lines: 49 In article vixie@decwrl.dec.com (Paul A Vixie) writes: >I've got IDA sendmail, which is able to generate BSMTP scripts. Decwrl >lets incoming UUCP requests execute the "bsmtp" command, and that all >works fine. I need one more piece to get rid of the inter-file handshake >delay: > >If I generate a BSMTP file, it will have in it exactly one mail transaction. >This is the same as for "rmail". What's needed is a way to get many of >these concat'd together into a single UUCP request, and since they can >be uux'd at different times (up to the uucico interval), sendmail is not >the place to put the concat logic. > >The only way I can think of to solve this is to put the bsmtp scripts into >some non-UUCP place and concat them with a perl or sh script run from cron. >This script would concat everything in, say, /var/spool/bsmtp/uunet/ into >one big file and then uux that to uunet!bsmtp. > >Anybody else done this? Did it help at all? What was the value for N? Paul, You've figured this out pretty much correctly. Some guys at NCR in San Diego worked up something a few years ago did a really low-level & non-portable thing. It figured out what the file name in /usr/spool/uucp for the outgoing batch was and wrote over the end of the BSMTP file with a new BSMTP message piece. What they wanted to avoid was queueing delays -- if their UUCP neighbor called up they wanted to make sure that all of the mail for that neighbor was in the UUCP, rather than some BSMTP queue. I would do pretty much what you suggest. Though since I use MMDF this is a bit easier since the `deliver' for the channel can be run at times I select (using cron) and it would take care of sweeping the queue. I wouldn't mind losing a few times when the neighbor polls me -- just to avoid the low-level hacking around with the queue'd data files. It really "ought" to help out a lot. I haven't done it, despite all the times I've said it would help a lot. I haven't ever felt I had the time to develop it any farther than I have.. Definitely not now. -- <- David Herron, an MMDF & WIN/MHS guy, <- Formerly: David Herron -- NonResident E-Mail Hack <- <- Sign me up for one "I survived Jaka's Story" T-shirt!