Invalid Queue Files with Postfix
glenn.steen at gmail.com
Fri Aug 17 21:39:20 IST 2007
On 17/08/07, Brad Beckenhauer <bbecken at aafp.org> wrote:
> >>> On 8/17/2007 at 9:34 AM, in message
> <46C5B203.5020108 at ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Julian
> Field <MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> > What versions of MailScanner and Postfix are you using?
> > If you are using a very recent Postfix, particularly if you are using
> > milters at all, you need to be running a pretty modern MailScanner.
> Currently running:
> postfix-2.1.5-5 upgrading to postfix-2.3.x in September 2007
> MailScanner 4.60.8 also upgrading in September.
> Centos 4.5
> At some point I'll move to sendmail when my work project load permits.
> Postfix has been running on 2.1.5 since June 2006, and I normally keep
> MailScanner up to date.
> It's pretty normal to find several (2-20) of these invalid queue files
> daily, so I check daily to make sure the queues keep clean.
Um, no ... or perhaps, depending in your normal volume that might be
normal.... But really, invalid queue files aren't really ... normal:-)
Being slightly intoxicated (sorry Hugo), I don't quite remember if
there was any changes to my milter changes ..... after 4.60.8, but you
might benefit from an upgrade.
The key issue is the use of milters, but I do seem to recall there
being some changes that affected all (since milters aren't an option
for that old a version of postfix).... where I didn't check for the
use of p records/milters before doing a spin through. Then again, the
spin should only adversely affect performance, not function.
So then the question becomes: how large a volume do you have?
> > Brad Beckenhauer wrote:
> >> I'm running a Postfix system using the Hold method and recently
> >> experienced a huge backlog due to "invalid queue files". Eventually
> >> hold directory got enough invalid queue files that MailScanner
> switch to
> >> "accelerated" mode of processing messages.
> >> sample from the maillog:
> >> Aug 17 08:37:48 mx2 MailScanner: New Batch: Found invalid
> >> files: B1FB93EE101
> >> Postcat of this file is below.
> >> Finding what's causing these invalid queue files and eliminating
> >> is the first issue.
> >> Would a feature in MailScanner that takes action when invalid queue
> >> files are found be useful to others?
> >> Such a feature could:
> >> Detect invalid queue files (which it already does) and
> >> a) Move the invalid queue file somewhere safe and notify the admin
> >> b) postsuper -d queue_file to get rid of it.
> >> Or how about a courtesy email to the email admin when MailScanner
> >> switches to "accelerated mode".
> >> postcat B1FB93EE101
> >> *** ENVELOPE RECORDS B1FB93EE101 ***
> >> message_size: 489 336 1
> >> 0
> >> message_arrival_time: Thu Aug 16 09:22:55 2007
> >> sender: Lucien.Hatch8400 at hot.ee
> >> named_attribute: client_name=22.214.171.124.dyn.user.ono.com
> >> named_attribute: client_address=126.96.36.199
> >> named_attribute:
> >> message_origin=188.8.131.52.dyn.user.ono.com[184.108.40.206]
> >> named_attribute: helo_name=220.127.116.11.dyn.user.ono.com
> >> named_attribute: protocol_name=SMTP
> >> original_recipient: tnolte at stfm.org
> >> recipient: tnolte at stfm.org
> >> *** MESSAGE CONTENTS B1FB93EE101 ***
> >> Received: from 18.104.22.168.dyn.user.ono.com
> >> (22.214.171.124.dyn.user.ono.com [126.96.36.199])
> >> by mx1.aafp.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B1FB93EE101
> >> for <tnolte at stfm.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:22:55 -0500
> >> Received: from martinique.hotbox.com (unknown [188.8.131.52])
> >> by galleryplanet.com with SMTP id 5[10
> >> Message-Id: <20070816142255.B1FB93EE101 at mx1.aafp.org>
> >> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:22:55 -0500 (CDT)
> >> From: Lucien.Hatch8400 at hot.ee
> >> To: undisclosed-recipients:;
> >> *** HEADER EXTRACTED B1FB93EE101 ***
> >> *** MESSAGE FILE END B1FB93EE101 ***
> > Jules
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se
More information about the MailScanner