Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
From: Justin McAleer (pflistfehuq.com)
Date: Mon Jan 14 2008 - 09:51:50 CST
Sandy Drobic wrote:
> It would add an awkward amount of overhead to the system, but it
> should work, if the scripts are solid.
Believe me, I am not going to argue that this is something we *should*
do. I've already lost that battle.
> Depending on the load of your systems it might make more sense to use
> multiple instances of Postfix, that are set to hold and will release
> the hold with a simple cron command. Then you can use the FILTER
> headercheck action to direct the mails to the appropriate instance
> where they will be held until release time. That way you spend a bit
> of time to set up the start/stop/maintenance scripts for multiple
> instances, but afterwards the system will run without any other
> intervention. Maintenance should be much more transparent as well.
Thanks for the reply. I hadn't considered needing to bypass the
header_checks for the requeued message, so I suppose I will need to use
multiple instances in some configuration.
I did want to clarify one thing about my problem, that I realize now may
have been misleading. I need end users to be able to arbitrarily set the
delivery date/time for these messages as composition time. I fear some
people may read my original mail as needing to schedule regular
deliveries of messages at specified times; that would be a more logical
thing to require, after all.