Mailscanner generated duplicate message.

[Glenn Steen]

On 24/12/2007, Julian Field <MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> Alex Broens wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/24/2007 3:23 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> >> Alex Broens wrote:
> >>> probably totally irrelevant yet got a hunch...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> what are your settings in MailScanner.conf for
> >>>
> >>> Queue Scan Interval
> >>>
> >>> Max Unscanned Messages Per Scan
> >>>
> >>> Max Unsafe Messages Per Scan
> >>
> >>
> >> Queue Scan Interval = 6
> >>
> >> Max Unscanned Messages Per Scan = 30
> >>
> >> Max Unsafe Messages Per Scan = 30
> >>
> >>
> >>> Could it be you're seeing a race condition between scanning threads?
> >>
> >>
> >> This is exactly what the problem seems to be, but I don't know what to
> >> do to prevent it or what I could have done or omitted to cause it.
> >>
> >> I suppose I could set
> >>
> >> Max Children = 1
> >>
> >> but that seems extreme, and it seems if it were necessary, more than
> >> just me would be seeing this problem.
> >
> > Single CPU:
> >
> > Max Children = 5
> >
> > Dual:
> >
> > Max Children = 8
> >
> > (keep the box relaxed till you get the stuff to process)
> >
> > Pls try:
> >
> > Queue Scan Interval = 15
> >
> > Max Unscanned Messages Per Scan = 5
> > Max Unsafe Messages Per Scan = 5
> >
> > You may need to tweek "Queue Scan Interval" to your box's perfomance
> >
> > my rule of thumb:
> >
> > Queue Scan Interval = thread_count + 3
> >
> > keep us posted
> >
> > h2h
> >
> > Alex
> >
> I've gone to quite some lengths to stop problems like this, and would be
> very interested in working out what might have caused it. The child
> processes should not be able to grab each other's messages, so unless a
> problem has arisen with the recent code for handling Postfix milters
> (which I didn't write all of) this really should not be possible. It
> never used to be a problem, which does seem to point a bit towards the
> milter handling code.

I know, I know... Caan't really see what my goof would've been this
time... But I will have a look. Not today though:-).

> I don't really have the time required to go through all that code I
> didn't write looking for possible problems of this nature (it's a far
> bigger job than just reading the code); I will have to rely on the
> author of that bit of code to do it. Sorry about that, but work (my
> bill-paying day job at the University) has been pretty busy recently.

... Same here, and having some kind of bug in my system (severe
headache... and the usual Crohns related sh*t...) ... Might just be
the mother of all hangovers though (Xmas celebrations start on the
24:th here in Sweden:-)... That notwithstanding... I'll try get into
the work-systems and check on my test-rigg.

> But even so, I'm always open to bribes of any nature :-)
:-)

> Happy Christmas!
.... And a merry new year...?;-)

Cheers
-- 
-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se