Обсуждение: email is fast!
I have noticed the past month that email is very fast. I hit send and the mailing list reply just appears in my mailbox! -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 12:46:25AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I have noticed the past month that email is very fast. I hit send and > the mailing list reply just appears in my mailbox! You are a lucky man then ;-) Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is good, yes :-P //Magnus
On 02 Feb 2007 at 9:21a +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 12:46:25AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> I have noticed the past month that email is very fast. I hit send and >> the mailing list reply just appears in my mailbox! > > You are a lucky man then ;-) > > Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then > suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of > mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is > good, yes :-P Being a fairly new lurker to the Postgresql lists, what is the reason for the speed delay? I, too, have a 3-5 hour delay, but I thought it was something to do with my end and greylisting. Now I'm not sure . . . :/ Thanks, Kevin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Tuesday, February 06, 2007 17:13:53 -0500 Kevin Hunter <hunteke@earlham.edu> wrote: > On 02 Feb 2007 at 9:21a +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 12:46:25AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> I have noticed the past month that email is very fast. I hit send and >>> the mailing list reply just appears in my mailbox! >> >> You are a lucky man then ;-) >> >> Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then >> suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of >> mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is >> good, yes :-P > > Being a fairly new lurker to the Postgresql lists, what is the reason for the > speed delay? I, too, have a 3-5 hour delay, but I thought it was something > to do with my end and greylisting. Now I'm not sure . . . :/ alot of the time, its greylisting ... but I'd be interested in seeing a copy of the full headers for one that has taken 3-5 hours to make sure ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFyQYe4QvfyHIvDvMRAtowAJ9ANedmpW7f0kZUu1qS4IzmfBhxbwCg0q4Y +6HTiptY6OnQ3PxBMAN7FaE= =HjWt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Kevin Hunter wrote: > On 02 Feb 2007 at 9:21a +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 12:46:25AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> I have noticed the past month that email is very fast. I hit send and >>> the mailing list reply just appears in my mailbox! >> >> You are a lucky man then ;-) >> >> Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then >> suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of >> mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is >> good, yes :-P > > Being a fairly new lurker to the Postgresql lists, what is the reason > for the speed delay? I, too, have a 3-5 hour delay, but I thought it > was something to do with my end and greylisting. Now I'm not sure . . . :/ Well greylisting will certainly be part of it. However I whitelist postgresql and I will regularly see many hour delays. > > Thanks, > > Kevin > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at > > http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Tuesday, February 06, 2007 17:13:53 -0500 Kevin Hunter <hunteke@earlham.edu> wrote: > On 02 Feb 2007 at 9:21a +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 12:46:25AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> I have noticed the past month that email is very fast. I hit send and >>> the mailing list reply just appears in my mailbox! >> >> You are a lucky man then ;-) >> >> Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then >> suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of >> mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is >> good, yes :-P > > Being a fairly new lurker to the Postgresql lists, what is the reason for the > speed delay? I, too, have a 3-5 hour delay, but I thought it was something > to do with my end and greylisting. Now I'm not sure . . . :/ Just to follow up this one ... Kevin sent me an email including the full headers for one that took 12 hours to be delivered ... using the QUEUE ID, I checked the logs and it turns out that the mail server couldn't resolve the MX the first and second time it tried to deliver, but succeeded on the third ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFyk+04QvfyHIvDvMRAuIrAJ9GgCpg3VcAXuIAVnUaMYUSoIkizQCgzOZl xj9Xf2c3ydoWnI6s/jIQH1I= =5rvW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Tuesday, February 06, 2007 17:28:16 -0800 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Kevin Hunter wrote: >> On 02 Feb 2007 at 9:21a +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 12:46:25AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>>> I have noticed the past month that email is very fast. I hit send and >>>> the mailing list reply just appears in my mailbox! >>> >>> You are a lucky man then ;-) >>> >>> Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then >>> suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of >>> mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is >>> good, yes :-P >> >> Being a fairly new lurker to the Postgresql lists, what is the reason >> for the speed delay? I, too, have a 3-5 hour delay, but I thought it >> was something to do with my end and greylisting. Now I'm not sure . . . :/ > > Well greylisting will certainly be part of it. However I whitelist > postgresql and I will regularly see many hour delays. Same applies to you as Kevin .. please send me the full headers of one that takes 'many hours' to deliver, and I'll check the logs for that specific one to see if I can determine the cause ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFyk/t4QvfyHIvDvMRAo77AJ9PZd6ieI4D/WJAC61PgDTk7j6McwCgjRDX QFpXqQvffhWHRDE7ZjYED/s= =4Un8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then >>> suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of >>> mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is >>> good, yes :-P >> Being a fairly new lurker to the Postgresql lists, what is the reason for the >> speed delay? I, too, have a 3-5 hour delay, but I thought it was something >> to do with my end and greylisting. Now I'm not sure . . . :/ > > Just to follow up this one ... Kevin sent me an email including the full > headers for one that took 12 hours to be delivered ... using the QUEUE ID, I > checked the logs and it turns out that the mail server couldn't resolve the MX > the first and second time it tried to deliver, but succeeded on the third ... This sounds scaringly close to the problem we had on wwwmaster with it not delivering emails. Resolving separately looked fine, but sendmail couldn't resolve. Could it be symptoms of the same problem? //Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Wednesday, February 07, 2007 23:21:21 +0100 Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: >>>> Well, yeah, it's much better, and quite often it is that fast. And then >>>> suddenly something happens and you have a 4-6 hour delay on a couple of >>>> mails, while others go through. But the speed-when-things-are-working is >>>> good, yes :-P >>> Being a fairly new lurker to the Postgresql lists, what is the reason for >>> the speed delay? I, too, have a 3-5 hour delay, but I thought it was >>> something to do with my end and greylisting. Now I'm not sure . . . :/ >> >> Just to follow up this one ... Kevin sent me an email including the full >> headers for one that took 12 hours to be delivered ... using the QUEUE ID, I >> checked the logs and it turns out that the mail server couldn't resolve the >> MX the first and second time it tried to deliver, but succeeded on the >> third ... > > This sounds scaringly close to the problem we had on wwwmaster with it > not delivering emails. Resolving separately looked fine, but sendmail > couldn't resolve. > Could it be symptoms of the same problem? Does postfix do any 'caching of results'? For instance, if it got a failed response, would it cache that and re-use that later, pending it timing out in its own cache? So try 1 failed, try 2 used cache and failed, try 3 was after cache timed out and re-tried, at which point the local DNS server had the right value ... - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFylpX4QvfyHIvDvMRAiRRAJwPkc49srmVPpyvARtqmsj4AkdDbwCeJAkD 1uOaaNeElpjYlfebp7PkYHI= =FYu7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 07:01:43PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >> Just to follow up this one ... Kevin sent me an email including the full > >> headers for one that took 12 hours to be delivered ... using the QUEUE ID, I > >> checked the logs and it turns out that the mail server couldn't resolve the > >> MX the first and second time it tried to deliver, but succeeded on the > >> third ... > > > > This sounds scaringly close to the problem we had on wwwmaster with it > > not delivering emails. Resolving separately looked fine, but sendmail > > couldn't resolve. > > Could it be symptoms of the same problem? > > Does postfix do any 'caching of results'? For instance, if it got a failed > response, would it cache that and re-use that later, pending it timing out in > its own cache? So try 1 failed, try 2 used cache and failed, try 3 was after > cache timed out and re-tried, at which point the local DNS server had the right > value ... I don't beleive it does. The resolver library might do it though - some do, others don't. //Magnus
On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 07:01:43PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > Does postfix do any 'caching of results'? For instance, if it got a failed > response, would it cache that and re-use that later, pending it timing out in > its own cache? So try 1 failed, try 2 used cache and failed, try 3 was after > cache timed out and re-tried, at which point the local DNS server had the right > value ... No, but your local resolver, which probably caches, almost certainly does. A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca In the future this spectacle of the middle classes shocking the avant- garde will probably become the textbook definition of Postmodernism. --Brad Holland