Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>, David Fetter <david@fetter.org>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@toroid.org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Tim Bunce <Tim.Bunce@pobox.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-02-01T14:03:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
2010/2/1 Matteo Beccati <php@beccati.com>: > On 01/02/2010 10:26, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >> Does the MBOX importer support incremental loading? Because majordomo >> spits out MBOX files for us already. > > Unfortunately the aoximport shell command doesn't support incremental loading. > >> One option could be to use SMTP with a subscription as the primary way >> (and we could set up a dedicated relaying from the mailserver for this >> of course, so it's not subject to graylisting or anything like that), >> and then daily or so load the MBOX files to cover anything that was >> lost? > > I guess we could write a script that parses the mbox and adds whatever is missing, as long as we keep it as a last resort if we can't make the primary delivery a fail proof. > > My main concern is that we'd need to overcomplicate the thread detection algorithm so that it better deals with delayed messages: as it currently works, the replies to a missing message get linked to the "grand-parent". Injecting the missing message afterwards will put it at the same level as its replies. If it happens only once in a while I guess we can live with it, but definitely not if it happens tens of times a day. That can potentially be a problem. Consider the case where message A it sent. Mesasge B is a response to A, and message C is a response to B. Now assume B is held for moderation (because the poser is not on the list, or because it trips some other thing), then message C will definitely arrive before message B. Is that going to cause problems with this method? Another case where the same thing will happen is if message delivery of B gets for example graylisted, or is just slow from sender B, but gets quickly delivered to the author of message A (because of a direct CC). In this case, the author of message A may respond to it (making message D),and this will again arrive before message B because author A is not graylisted. So the system definitely needs to deal with out-of-order delivery. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/