> Today I saw again (it is still) that on some reason MercuryC
> (installed on NW 5.1) stuck on message delivery. I load another
> instance (as Mr. Stephenson suggested) and then e-mails get delivered
> again (beside this one which stuck with MercuryC 1-st instance). As I
> have Mercury/32 installed also (on WXP box with ASSP on front) I
> wonder is may be reasonable to load on this Mercury/32 box Novell
> Client and log into NW server and add to M/32 additional queue pointed
> to NW server Mercury smtpqueue directory? Is that OK? M/32 is probably
> newer and could handle messages in more ... efficient way!? Make this
> sense?

Can't hurt but the problem is that Mercury/32 MercuryC must be handling the mail exclusively and when using MercuryC the NLM version is more efficient.  There is no way that a single instance MercuryC of Mercury/32 is going to be more efficient than 5 instances of MercuryC.NLM handling the queue in a round robin fachion.  This is especially true if you are using multiple relay hosts but even if using a single relay host you will be using 5 paths instead of just one.  

Hi!
Today I saw again (it is still) that on some reason MercuryC (installed on NW 5.1) stuck on message delivery. I load another instance (as Mr. Stephenson suggested) and then e-mails get delivered again (beside this one which stuck with MercuryC 1-st instance). As I have Mercury/32 installed also (on WXP box with ASSP on front) I wonder is may be reasonable to load on this Mercury/32 box Novell Client and log into NW server and add to M/32 additional queue pointed to NW server Mercury smtpqueue directory? Is that OK? M/32 is probably newer and could handle messages in more ... efficient way!? Make this sense?
More thanks, Alar.