Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer |
|
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
I understand your point completely. Five years ago I would agree, but these days, things aren't necessarily the same.
If you have a Web cluster with fifteen plus machines, are you really going to run an MTA on each one? It would likely be a lot easier to use the designated MTA and go from there. Should each user in a company have an MTA on their local workstation just because? Yes, networks can be unreliable, but then, if they're down, who's using your application anyway? Secondly, if your MTA is down, don't you think that's going to get fixed right away? These things are usually important. And yes, services can be overloaded, but what does this mean? I'd rather not have to rewrite my application just because I kill off the local MTA, or change it to something more secure than sendmail. I don't mean to badger. We all have our preferences. Given that, I reiterate: Since you can use Mail::Mailer in either SMTP or 'mailx'-type mode, it's probably better to use that than to just assume 'mailx' is going to work. You can, after all, use Mail::Mailer in a variety of ways, but 'mailx' only works in one, possibly broken, way. In reply to Re^2: Can I clean this up??
by tadman
|
|