RE: FW: table foo has changed ... so?

["Sheldon T. Hall" <pf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Magnus Bäck wrote ...
> On Sunday, January 02, 2005 at 01:27 CET,
>      "Sheldon T. Hall" <pf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> > Is Postfix's restarting an issue, either with resource 
> > consumption or continuity of service?
> > 
> > Should I restrict the frequency of changes to the table?
> 
> Yes, if they occur so frequently that you get a performance 
> hit from it.
> If the table is changed more often than, say, once every minute or two
> you should probably consider updating it less frequently.

Once per minute would seem to be seldom enough,  Right now the table changes
about 5 times per day.  Most of the names were already in the whitelist;
before I began using it I loaded it using information from the logs.
Changes only occur when a user writes to someone new, which isn't all that
often.

> But that
> also depends on your server load. Postfix' smtpd processes are
> eventually retired anyway (subject to $max_use and $max_idle), so a
> slight increase in the number of process starts won't affect 
> performance much.

I had forgotten about the smtpd retirement pattern.  Thanks for the memory
jog and for putting my mind at rest ... at least on this issue.

-Shel