Tue, 23 Jun 1992 17:29:17 +0200
|
On Tue, 23 Jun 1992 10:26:26 EST Nick Laflamme <NLAFLAMM@IRISHVMA> said:
>I'm sure Eric will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think LISTSERV needs
>to keep its subscriber lists in node-sorted order so it can efficiently
>distribute mail and bunch addressees appropriately. If you sort manually
>and replace, results are not predictable, and even if it survives that,
>LISTSERV will try to add new users in node sorted order, but I'm kind of
>skeptical about LISTSERV surviving that kind of abuse in the first
>place.
This was correct a few releases ago, and is still correct in some
respects, but the situation is changing. LISTSERV does keep the list
sorted by nodeid and may indeed re-sort it this way when adding new
subscribers. The "Mail-via= Direct" exploder does assume that the list is
sorted this way, but that code is going to be removed some day, as I said
in the last release notes. DISTRIBUTE doesn't care in what order the list
was sorted, because it gets recipient lists from all kinds of unsorted
sources and has to be able to handle them.
So if you run 1.7c and use DISTRIBUTE for the list, nothing really bad
should happen if you sort the recipients another way, except that
LISTSERV is liable to re-sort it the "right" way from time to time. I
still advise against playing with the LIST files, though, as I may have
forgotten some side-effect impact and any code that tampers will LIST
files will stop working eventually, as I have plans to radically alter
the way subscriptions are recorded by the server.
Eric
|
|
|