At 5:49 PM -0500 2/2/1997, Eric Thomas wrote:
>This is an implementation problem that can be solved in all sorts of
>ways, such as maintaining a "total size of mailbox" field in the mailbox
>header or whatever makes sense given your existing implementation.
Then you've got to update that number every time you insert a new
message, delete an old one, etc.... The same amount of work would be
required, though.
>That's a valid argument, but you can charge extra for the service, or you
>can contain the growth by adding a higher per-message cap. To tell you
>the truth, I think most people would be happy with 1000-1500 total. It's
>just that if you divide 500 by the number of days in a long weekend, it's
>less than what most active lists produce a day. People then lose personal
>mail and get upset.
1000 or 1500 might be fine for now, but I guarantee you that it
wouldn't last -- probably a month or two, then people would start
subscribing to even more high-traffic lists (because now the problem
doesn't happen any more) and then we're right back where we were.
If more people subscribed to digests for everything, this problem
would be virtually non-existant. Maybe that should be part of your
test to see if someone should be allowed to do more advanced things
-- can they figure out how to get themselves switched from digest
mode to reflector mode (and figure out how to deal with the
consequences when it blows up in their face)?
--
Brad Knowles, MIME/PGP: brad@his.com
comp.mail.sendmail FAQ Maintainer <http://www.his.com/~brad/>
finger brad@his.com for my PGP Public Keys and Geek Code
The comp.mail.sendmail FAQ is at <http://www.his.com/~brad/sendmail/>
References:
|
|
