Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 618709FB1CB for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:59:57 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 27755-07 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:59:14 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 687F99FB1EC for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 15:59:16 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.199.198] (c213-100-160-41.swipnet.se [213.100.160.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C622CDCC12B; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 20:59:09 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <45A2A297.3030702@hagander.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 20:59:19 +0100 From: Magnus Hagander User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Sabino Mullane CC: pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Problems with pgsql-announce References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200701/27 X-Sequence-Number: 11294 Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: > >> 1) I thougth we'd set up pgsql-announce so that it didn't bounce to the >> sender? I'm still getting 20-30 bounce messages every time I post to >> -announce. > > Could be misconfigured on the sender's end. If you want, send me a list > of the offenders and I'll remove 'em. That goes for anyone else as well. > >> 2) For some reason, I got four duplicate checksum warnings for *one* >> posting to announce. Example: > > Yeah, something weird is going on there. From looking at the moderation > queue, it seems everyone is getting three or four duplicates. Maybe > we can simply turn that off, Marc? I think we've seen a lot of examples of that "partial message duplicate" filter blocking things it shouldn't. I know Dave had some problems before, and at some point it started blocking almost all mail to the slaves list (because those are very similar *by design*). Do we have any indication that this helps *at all*? If not, we should just turn it off on all the lists... Which reminds me - I saw several emails pop through today after spending >48 hours in the Maia Mailguard. Does that one actually help noticably for list traffic, or just for mailboxes? Because it certainly happens often that it slows down or stops list traffic completely.. //Magnus