At 05:19 PM 10/15/2006, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>OutgoingRunner is missing. there are no 'caught SIGINT', 'exiting',
>'[restarting]' or 'started' entries for it.
>
>What is in the qrunner log prior to this? Presumably there are entries
>from last Wednesday indicating its 'restart limit' was reached.
T
Allan Trick wrote:
>At 03:23 PM 10/15/2006, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>
>>Is OutgoingRunner running? If not, are there any messages in
>>Mailman's 'qrunner' log indicating why or when it stopped?
>
>I think so. See below.
>
>>Have you tried 'bin/mailmanctl restart'?
>
>Yes, to no avail. When I do that
At 03:23 PM 10/15/2006, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>Is OutgoingRunner running? If not, are there any messages in
>Mailman's 'qrunner' log indicating why or when it stopped?
I think so. See below.
>Have you tried 'bin/mailmanctl restart'?
Yes, to no avail. When I do that, this is what is logged in th
Allan Trick wrote:
>
>The last message that made it to any of our lists went out last
>Wednesday. There are a bunch of .pck files in the qfiles/out
>directory, so I think there are messages trying to get out. One of
>them that someone called and asked me about DOES show up in the
>archives fo
Following on to what I read in the archives of a problem Elizabeth
Schwartz was having, I'm having the same thing happen to me.
The last message that made it to any of our lists went out last
Wednesday. There are a bunch of .pck files in the qfiles/out
directory, so I think there are messages
Following on to what I read in the archives of a problem Elizabeth
Schwartz was having about a month ago, I'm having the same thing happen to me.
The last message that made it to any of our lists went out last
Wednesday. There are a bunch of .pck files in the qfiles/out
directory, so I think t
At 11:56 AM -0400 9/27/06, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> You've made this point before and each time you do, I remember
> that it's a good one. :) Brad, would you mind adding this to
> the Mailman 2.2 wiki page?
Will do.
> I think it's a worthy feature to add.
Thanks!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 26, 2006, at 9:07 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
> But you're still using a single directory as an on-disk queue, and
> that single directory has to be completely locked, operated on, and
> then unlocked every single time you want to create a new
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
>I checked in last night and mailman was hung
>again, but this time I saw that the OutgoingRunner process was missing, and
>there are errors in the error log:
The 'error' log or the 'qrunner' log?
>Sep 23 08:10:17 2006 (2180) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
>(
At 2:45 PM -0400 9/26/06, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Actually, Mailman does implement a hashed queue of sorts for its
> queue runners. Every queue file is assigned a hash and a timestamp,
> encoded in the file name. The timestamp is so that qrunners can
> handle the files in FIFO order. The hash
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 26, 2006, at 2:12 PM, Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 8:51 AM -0400 9/26/06, Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
>
>> Another question: is there any parallelism of processing files
>> in the out
>> queue or are they done sequentially?
>
> By default, it's
At 8:51 AM -0400 9/26/06, Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
> Another question: is there any parallelism of processing files in the out
> queue or are they done sequentially?
By default, it's single-threaded -- but not really "sequential". It
has more to do with how the directory entries are written
Thanks again for all your help. I checked in last night and mailman was hung
again, but this time I saw that the OutgoingRunner process was missing, and
there are errors in the error log:
Sep 23 08:10:17 2006 (2180) Master qrunner detected subprocess exit
(pid: 1592, sig: None, sts: 1, class: Outg
Patrick Bogen wrote:
>
>Might it be worthwhile to add a cautionary note to unshunt's help
>files, to the effect that it should ONLY be used on qfiles/shunt, and
>that its use on other queues will probably result in lost messages?
>
>Alternatively, maybe have it detect thigns that weren't actually
>
On 9/22/06, Mark Sapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The moral is "don't unshunt anything which wasn't shunted to begin
> with".
Might it be worthwhile to add a cautionary note to unshunt's help
files, to the effect that it should ONLY be used on qfiles/shunt, and
that its use on other queues will
Mark Sapiro wrote:
>Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
>>
>>Having cleaned that out, it sounds like I then proceeded to trash
>>an afternoon's worth of messages by trying to flush the queue incorrectly.
>
>
>I'm afraid so.
In case anyone is interested in the details, what actually happened
when you ran
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
>
>My theory: my **original** problem was a large HTML message gunking up the
>out box.
I'm not sure about this part. What's in Mailman's 'smtp' log?
>Having cleaned that out, it sounds like I then proceeded to trash
>an afternoon's worth of messages by trying to flus
Sigh... OK, thank you all for the help. I think I understand now!
My theory: my **original** problem was a large HTML message gunking up the
out box. Having cleaned that out, it sounds like I then proceeded to trash
an afternoon's worth of messages by trying to flush the queue incorrectly.
Fortun
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
>To follow up to my own post:
>I have rebooted twice and restarted twice
>I see no interesting error messages in any logs
>A few messages occasionally are getting through
>I have read the FAQ but found nothing applicable.
>
>If there's a MIME message gunking up the works,
Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
>
>After working fine for a month, my mailman install broke this morning (I
>know something must have changed but I can't see what!) Mail sent to lists
>ends up in /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/out . If I run unshunt, nothing
>changes. If I run unshunt /usr/local/mailman/qfil
At 6:55 PM -0400 9/22/06, Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
> I have read the FAQ but found nothing applicable.
FAQ 3.14 has most of the relevant advice that I could provide. If
you didn't find anything there that was helpful to you, then I'm not
sure I can say much of anything more.
> If there's a
(and yep, all the qrunner processes are running and look OK, from here)
On 9/22/06, Elizabeth Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> To follow up to my own post:
> I have rebooted twice and restarted twice
> I see no interesting error messages in any logs
> A few messages occasionally are getting
To follow up to my own post:
I have rebooted twice and restarted twice
I see no interesting error messages in any logs
A few messages occasionally are getting through
I have read the FAQ but found nothing applicable.
If there's a MIME message gunking up the works, where *is* it? The qfiles
subdire
At 6:15 PM -0400 9/22/06, Elizabeth Schwartz wrote:
> Tearing my hair out here. Thanks for any clues as to what might be causing
> this or where to LOOK.
I'd be willing to bet that you got a message that came in which had
some malformed MIME structures, and that has clogged up the queue for
t
Elizabeth Schwartz sent the message below at 15:15 9/22/2006:
>I'm running mailman 2.1.8 on Solaris 10 (06/06)
>
>After working fine for a month, my mailman install broke this morning (I
>know something must have changed but I can't see what!) Mail sent to lists
>ends up in /usr/local/mailman/qfi
I'm running mailman 2.1.8 on Solaris 10 (06/06)
After working fine for a month, my mailman install broke this morning (I
know something must have changed but I can't see what!) Mail sent to lists
ends up in /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/out . If I run unshunt, nothing
changes. If I run unshunt /usr/
26 matches
Mail list logo
