Found nn messages in the processing-messages database

Mark Sapiro mark at
Tue Apr 21 03:41:34 IST 2009

Julian Field wrote:
>On 20/4/09 15:48, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 12:44:14PM +0200, Glenn Steen wrote:
>>> If you go from totally random to deterministic/file, you'd still get
>>> the needed uniqueness as well as the same key for the same queue file
>>> (in the processing DB)... Which seems to be the problem needing to be
>>> solved...?
>> Yes, this appears to be the problem needing to be solved in Kai's case,
>> but it is not the problem in my case. See my post at
>> <>.
>> Note that the Postfix log entries quoted in that post come from a grep
>> of the ID only without the .entropy fragment and are the only entries
>> found in the entire log.
>Do you ever see any log entries containing
>"New Batch: Found invalid queue files:"
>when your mail source sends a large lump of messages?

No. I don't have any messages like that in the log.

>Also, please try the latest beta 4.76.14. This may help with this 
>problem. I have worked out why it would end up with messages in there 
>when it shouldn't, but I can't see where it actually does it. It 
>shouldn't be able to happen. So I have added some more clauses to cause 
>it to ignore partially-delivered messages, which are what must be 
>causing the problem.

OK. I have installed 4.76.14 and I removed the Processing.db file and
let MailScanner recreate it when I restarted following the 4.76.14

I will report what I see after it runs for a while.

Mark Sapiro <mark at>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

More information about the MailScanner mailing list