So sprach SoloCDM am 2002-08-05 um 13:41:28 -0600 :
Would it make more sense if I did the following?
fetchmail -a -b 50 -B 250 -e 50
I came to this conclusion knowing it expunges every 50, so batchlimit
can "build up a new connection" for every 50 messages.
Yes, it makes more sense to set the batchlimit to 50 if you use qmail or
smail as your local SMTP daemon. Other SMTP servers like Postfix or
sendmail don't "require" this. If you use one of those SMTP servers, or
if you directly pipe the mails to some sort of local MDA like procmail,
I wouldn't set a batchlimit at all.
Also, as far as I can tell, there's no relation between the »batchlimit«
and the »expunge« number. batchlimit has an effect on the receiving
side of the fetch process (ie. the local side), while expunge (and also
fetchlimit) effect "how" fetchmail gets the mails send (ie. from the
remote side).
Short version: Yes, -b 50 -B 250 -e 50 makes a lot more sense than -b
250 -B 250 -e 50. (BTW: -B 250 -e 250 might make sense, if you're
fetching mails from a (loaded) IMAP server; if you're fetching from a
POP3 server, it wouldn't make any sense at all.)
Alexander Skwar
--
How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english)
Homepage: http://www.iso-top.biz | Jabber:
askwar(_at_)a-message(_dot_)de
iso-top.biz - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen
Uptime: 2 hours 27 minutes