Re: [Mailman-Users] and a message to root from output cron job
Thank you Richard. When i've changed the if sentence four or six messages to the locked list was received inmediatly. It's first time that i don't need to remove the list and create again to continueing receiving messages... very nice :-D Maybe this is the solution, because now one machine-list is working and got locked too, so i'll probe this with the two machines working together and writting into the same /lists and /archives nfs mounts... Do you think this is posible, Richard?? thanks Richard Barrett wrote: Javier On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 11:48 am, javier wrote: From Super-User root To root Date Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:36:06 +0100 (MET) Subject Output from cron command Your cron job on burlador /usr/local/bin/python -S /usr/local/mailman/cron/senddigests produced the following output: Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/local/mailman/cron/senddigests, line 94, in ? main() File /usr/local/mailman/cron/senddigests, line 86, in main mlist.send_digest_now() File /usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Digester.py, line 60, in send_digest_now ToDigest.send_digests(self, mboxfp) File /usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Handlers/ToDigest.py, line 131, in send_digests send_i18n_digests(mlist, mboxfp) File /usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Handlers/ToDigest.py, line 304, in send_i18n_digests msg = scrubber(mlist, msg) File /usr/local/mailman/Mailman/Handlers/Scrubber.py, line 311, in process t = t.encode(charset, 'replace') File /usr/local/lib/python2.2/encodings/__init__.py, line 51, in search_function mod = __import__(modname,globals(),locals(),'*') ValueError: Empty module name From a quick look at the code, I think this may happen if a message has an invalid Content-type: header of the form: Content-type: text/foo; charset= That is, it has a charset parameter but no actual value has been assigned to it. But I could be wrong. As a quick fix you could try changing line 280 of $prefix/Mailman/Handlers/Scrubber.py from: if charset is None or charset == 'us-ascii': to: if charset is None or charset == '' or charset == 'us-ascii': If you try this hack let me know whether it works or not. I am not sure if this is the best long term fix but if it appears to work I will look at the problem a bit further. Do not forget to backup the Scrubber.py before changing it in case you have to revert to the original. Regards Richard -- Javier Romero Casado tel.913357274 Dep. Comunicaciones CEDEX -- Javier Romero Casado tel.913357274 Dep. Comunicaciones CEDEX -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] Re: Mailman and Debian
Hi Pascal, I was wondering if there was a reason why the only Mailman version available as a stable debian package is version 2.0.11? Version 2.1.3 is marked as unstable. Is the new version still in beta or is it ready to be deployed on a production site. In other words, would you recommend upgrading from 2.0.11 to 2.1.3 on a production site that uses mailman extensibly? I am using Mailman on a Woody server for managing the TYPO3 mailing lists. Two weeks ago, I did an upgrade from 2.0.11 to a backported 2.1.2 version I found at http://people.debian.org/~hmh/woody/hmh/ There were no big problems except some missing packages (you'll find them on the same server!) and the mailman list which needed to be created. Two weeks later, everything seems to work fine! However, it's still good to make a backup of your server before proceeding with the updates. Good luck! - michael -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
I'm using Mailman 2.1.2 on FreeBSD v4.8-Release, built using the port. MTA is sendmail 8.12.8p1 Very frequently I will see the ArchRunner process using 99+ % of cpu. I have searched the archives and found lots of messages about qrunners using large percentages of cpu, but they all seem to talk about the fixes being related to actual mail processing (sendmail), not archRunner. I am assuming that if the problem was mail delivery or reception I would be seeing the large cpu use on a different qrunner process. My issue is specific to the archrunner process which I don't find much on in the archives/faq. I am using a pretty default install, haven't tweaked anything. If it helps... here are some possibly germane things: 1) I never seem to be able to catch anything in /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/archive, but that may be a timing thing, as my archives do appear to be getting updated. 2) I looked in the /usr/local/mailman/archives/private/*.mbox directories, and find listname.mbox at 33mb and listname.mbox.1 at 54mb. Could it be that these files are just so big that it takes huge amounts of cpu to add posts to these? I'm guessing they are the archives. This gives rise to several questions (someone else maintained this setup before I did). Does mailman split them (the .1 file), or can I just rename listname.mbox to listname.mbox.2 and mailman will have a smaller chunk to deal with? Any thoughts? Thanks in advance!!! I have another question or two but will post separately for them. Jay West --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] Question on digest headers
I'm using Mailman 2.1.2 on FreeBSD v4.8-Release, built using the port. MTA is sendmail 8.12.8p1 I was using a previous release of mailman, v2.0.x. I built a new machine to run 2.1.2 on and did a fresh mailman install, then just moved the lists and archives from the old machine to the new machine. All appears to be well (except see previous post ;) ). Some of my subscribers noticed that the headers on the digest changed from the old release to the new release. Specifically, on the older version of mailman, the digest header or subject said how many messages were in that digest. The new version of mailman, the digest just says volume number basically. It doesn't say how many messages are in the digest - something my users apparently would really like to see back again. Can someone point me in the right direction as to how to add this back in? Thanks! Jay West --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
Well you've pegged it. That was a bug in version 2.1.2 which is fixed in 2.1.3. The patch for 2.1.2 should still be available - you could probably patch your running system and just leave it at that (an upgrade will bring the patch in anyway). Good Luck - Jon Carnes On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 09:26, Jay West wrote: I'm using Mailman 2.1.2 on FreeBSD v4.8-Release, built using the port. MTA is sendmail 8.12.8p1 Very frequently I will see the ArchRunner process using 99+ % of cpu. I have searched the archives and found lots of messages about qrunners using large percentages of cpu, but they all seem to talk about the fixes being related to actual mail processing (sendmail), not archRunner. I am assuming that if the problem was mail delivery or reception I would be seeing the large cpu use on a different qrunner process. My issue is specific to the archrunner process which I don't find much on in the archives/faq. I am using a pretty default install, haven't tweaked anything. If it helps... here are some possibly germane things: 1) I never seem to be able to catch anything in /usr/local/mailman/qfiles/archive, but that may be a timing thing, as my archives do appear to be getting updated. 2) I looked in the /usr/local/mailman/archives/private/*.mbox directories, and find listname.mbox at 33mb and listname.mbox.1 at 54mb. Could it be that these files are just so big that it takes huge amounts of cpu to add posts to these? I'm guessing they are the archives. This gives rise to several questions (someone else maintained this setup before I did). Does mailman split them (the .1 file), or can I just rename listname.mbox to listname.mbox.2 and mailman will have a smaller chunk to deal with? Any thoughts? Thanks in advance!!! I have another question or two but will post separately for them. Jay West --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/jonc%40nc.rr.com -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] mailman migration
Hi, I was currently using mailman 2.0.13. This system was deployed into /home/mailman directory. I redeploy a new server in mandrake 9.2 I use the package mailman-2.1.2. The current install is in /var/lib/mailman. How can I import my previous mailing list configuration and archive from mailman 2.0.13 to my new mailman version? I created symbolic links for /list and /archive to my previous version. But I didn't see previous mailinglists. Is there anything else that I should do? Regards Fabrice -- Message Classification: [x] General Business Use [ ] Motorola internal use [ ] Motorola confidential proprietary Fabrice Barbarin [EMAIL PROTECTED] System EngineerMotorola Centre de Recherche - Paris -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] optionsurl not using full domain
For some reason my new subscriber messages are going out with only my hostname, not the full domain name in the urls. For example the welcome messages tells people to click http://mailbox/mailman/listinfo/galileo instead of http://mailbox.gsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/galileo I can't find a way to set the optionsurl variable to the full domain name. Any help will be greatly appreciated. -- Michael Alberghini Software Systems Engineer Georgia State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] Problem with mailman inserting new lines into Subject: header
Hi - I've got Mailman 2.1b2 installed. I have a problem because Mailman occasionally inserts a newline (x010) after the list name close bracket and before the subject description in the Subject: header line. It appears that this happens only with longer subject lines. This causes a problem in Eudora, because the short display of the subject only shows the list name and not the subject description. Is there a quick fix? Garey Mills Library Systems Office UC Berkeley -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 09:40:11AM -0500, Jon Carnes wrote: On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 09:26, Jay West wrote: I'm using Mailman 2.1.2 on FreeBSD v4.8-Release, built using the port. MTA is sendmail 8.12.8p1 Very frequently I will see the ArchRunner process using 99+ % of cpu. I have searched the archives and found lots of messages about qrunners using large percentages of cpu, but they all seem to talk about the fixes being related to actual mail processing (sendmail), not archRunner. I am assuming that if the problem was mail delivery or reception I would be seeing the large cpu use on a different qrunner process. My issue is specific to the archrunner process which I don't find much on in the archives/faq. Well you've pegged it. That was a bug in version 2.1.2 which is fixed in 2.1.3. The patch for 2.1.2 should still be available - you could probably patch your running system and just leave it at that (an upgrade will bring the patch in anyway). I still see this problem with Mailman 2.1.3 for a high-volume list. PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPUCPU COMMAND 66428 mailman 64 0 168M 147M CPU1 0 376.7H 99.02% 99.02% python2.3 That's the archiver process. There are 1318 messages in the archive queue... 12:00:28 Fri Oct 31 # truss -p 66428 break(0x114f6000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1302c000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114f8000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1303)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114fa000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13034000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114fc000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13038000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114fe000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1303c000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1150)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1304)= 0 (0x0) break(0x11502000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13044000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x11504000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13048000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x11506000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1304c000)= 0 (0x0) Once I kill off the mailman queue runners and clean up the several lock files for this mailing list, it runs just fine and manages to empty the archive queue. Two days worth of mailman cron jobs were still stuck in the process list. Supposition: Maybe they were blocked by the list's lockfile? So, it seems that the archRunner process went off the deep end somewhere between two and three days ago. I have the htdig patches for 2.1.3 installed. Which might be germane... -- Scott LambertKC5MLE Unix SysAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
On Friday, October 31, 2003, at 08:52 pm, Scott Lambert wrote: On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 09:40:11AM -0500, Jon Carnes wrote: On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 09:26, Jay West wrote: I'm using Mailman 2.1.2 on FreeBSD v4.8-Release, built using the port. MTA is sendmail 8.12.8p1 Very frequently I will see the ArchRunner process using 99+ % of cpu. I have searched the archives and found lots of messages about qrunners using large percentages of cpu, but they all seem to talk about the fixes being related to actual mail processing (sendmail), not archRunner. I am assuming that if the problem was mail delivery or reception I would be seeing the large cpu use on a different qrunner process. My issue is specific to the archrunner process which I don't find much on in the archives/faq. Well you've pegged it. That was a bug in version 2.1.2 which is fixed in 2.1.3. The patch for 2.1.2 should still be available - you could probably patch your running system and just leave it at that (an upgrade will bring the patch in anyway). I still see this problem with Mailman 2.1.3 for a high-volume list. PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZERES STATE C TIME WCPUCPU COMMAND 66428 mailman 64 0 168M 147M CPU1 0 376.7H 99.02% 99.02% python2.3 That's the archiver process. There are 1318 messages in the archive queue... 12:00:28 Fri Oct 31 # truss -p 66428 break(0x114f6000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1302c000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114f8000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1303)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114fa000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13034000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114fc000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13038000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x114fe000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1303c000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1150)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1304)= 0 (0x0) break(0x11502000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13044000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x11504000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x13048000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x11506000)= 0 (0x0) break(0x1304c000)= 0 (0x0) Once I kill off the mailman queue runners and clean up the several lock files for this mailing list, it runs just fine and manages to empty the archive queue. Two days worth of mailman cron jobs were still stuck in the process list. Supposition: Maybe they were blocked by the list's lockfile? So, it seems that the archRunner process went off the deep end somewhere between two and three days ago. I have the htdig patches for 2.1.3 installed. Which might be germane... If you are referring to patch #444884 then, while I would never say never, it is not highly likely to be the cause. The code inserted by patch #444884 impinges very little on the execution path taken when mail is being archived and archive pages are being generated by pipermail. If you discover any different let me know and I'll take another look at the htdig integration patch. You say you have the problem with a high volume list. What sort of message sizes and traffic volume is the list handling? Do the messages tend to have large attachments? I have found that the internal pipermail archiver starts to choke on high volume lists and on a least one of them I run the solution I adopted was to reduce the archiving period from a month to a week, which seemed to alleviate the problem. I suspect the problem is partially related to the pickled data structures that pipermail uses to control archiver operation and index generation. I'm now using a fairly tight Mailman/MHonArc integration for such lists; I developed it because MHonArc has a reputation for handling large archives better than pipermail but I still wanted MM list archive privacy, my htdig integration, etc. A patch for this is available at http://www.openinfo.co.uk/mailman/patches/mhonarc/index.html or as MM patch #820723 on sourceforge. It subcontracts MHonArc to generate the message and period index pages in the normal $prefix/archives/private/listname/archive-period directory structure while the pipermail/MM code looks after the top level index, archive control and access control. The integration makes the choice of pipermail or MHonArc a per-list option so if you change your mind or decide it was all a big mistake it is not a disaster; select the archiver of choice and run $prefix/bin/arch --wipe to have the archiver of choice regenerate the list archive from the its mbox file. So far this MM/MH integration has worked OK for me but that's a single data point. Enough over-selling of a free product and the usual caveat emptor :) but if you give it a try let me
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s ofcpu (read faq archives)
John wrote... Well you've pegged it. That was a bug in version 2.1.2 which is fixed in 2.1.3. The patch for 2.1.2 should still be available - you could probably patch your running system and just leave it at that (an upgrade will bring the patch in anyway). I am having trouble finding that specific patch (for archrunner performance) in the patch area of the website. I see one patch specifically for archrunner, but the things that it fixes don't mention anything that sounds outwardly similar to my performance problem. Can someone confirm or deny if this is the correct patch? If not, maybe point me to the right one? Thanks! Jay West --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with mailman inserting new lines into Subject: header
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 14:39, Garey Mills wrote: Hi - I've got Mailman 2.1b2 installed. I have a problem because Mailman occasionally inserts a newline (x010) after the list name close bracket and before the subject description in the Subject: header line. It appears that this happens only with longer subject lines. This causes a problem in Eudora, because the short display of the subject only shows the list name and not the subject description. Is there a quick fix? Garey Mills Library Systems Office UC Berkeley I was just looking at that code yesterday. It's clearly laid out and documented - and easily removed or modified. You wouldn't even need to re-install, just edit and fly. Have fun - Jon Carnes -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 03:52:34PM -0500, Scott Lambert wrote: Once I kill off the mailman queue runners and clean up the several lock files for this mailing list, it runs just fine and manages to empty the archive queue. Well, the above statement is not entirely accurate. It was working quickly immediately after restart but went downhill. I logged out and took care of other things after seeing it move a good number of messages in a short amount of time. Five hours later, it still had 377 messages in the archive queue and was taking several minutes per message. I trussed it again and saw more of the incredibly long series of breaks, but watched it long than I did this morning. After a lot of breaks it goes to a lot of writes then does some file stuff quickly and repeats for the next message. I restarted the queue runners again and it it processed fourty or so messages quickly then began the downward spiral again. Within reducing the queue to 177 entries, it was back to 3 minutes per message and expanding. Restarting knocked it down pretty quick for a while then started taking longer again. I was watching more closely this time. After a couple more restart cycles, the queue was cleaned out quickly and all is well. I haven't looked at the code yet, and probably won't (ENOTIME), but it almost sounds to me like it's not pruning it's list of handled messages and has to walk all of them each time. I would have expected queue handling to get faster as the queue got smaller due to fewer files in the directory that it needs to search through. Maybe it's just a function of the python datastructure being used. The fast after restart part makes me doubt that it is the size of the archive that is at issue. The server we are using is a dual PIII450 machine. I would guess this would not show as such a big problem on a more modern system, but other than the archiver, this box is more than enough for the load on it. The dual processor aspect of this box is what allows us to miss the archiver running off the deep end until someone complains that the archive search feature is broken. The mail passes through the system just fine using the other processor. 38M2003-October.txt 13M2003-October.txt.gz 48Mportsidelist.mbox -- Scott LambertKC5MLE Unix SysAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
At 6:21 PM -0500 2003/10/31, Scott Lambert wrote: I haven't looked at the code yet, and probably won't (ENOTIME), but it almost sounds to me like it's not pruning it's list of handled messages and has to walk all of them each time. I would have expected queue handling to get faster as the queue got smaller due to fewer files in the directory that it needs to search through. Maybe it's just a function of the python datastructure being used. If it's using files as the queue mechanism, then deleting a file simply marks the entry in the directory as available, and it still takes just at long to scan the directory afterwards as it did before. This is a known problem with many MTAs handling large amounts of messages, and is one reason why you should use a hashed directory scheme for your mail queue (a la postfix), or you should periodically stop the MTA, move the mail queue directory aside, create a new mail queue directory (with appropriate ownership and permissions), then move what messages may remain from the old queue back into the new one (or fire up queue runners to clear the old queue while the new one is being used for new mail). Mailman could very easily be suffering from the same sort of problem -- once you get a directory with a large number of entries in it, it takes a long time to scan it even if there are only a few files that are currently visible. Same problem, perhaps the same solution? -- Brad Knowles, [EMAIL PROTECTED] They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++): a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI$ P+++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+() DI+() D+(++) G+() e++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++) -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
On Friday, October 31, 2003, at 11:59 pm, Brad Knowles wrote: At 6:21 PM -0500 2003/10/31, Scott Lambert wrote: I haven't looked at the code yet, and probably won't (ENOTIME), but it almost sounds to me like it's not pruning it's list of handled messages and has to walk all of them each time. I would have expected queue handling to get faster as the queue got smaller due to fewer files in the directory that it needs to search through. Maybe it's just a function of the python datastructure being used. If it's using files as the queue mechanism, then deleting a file simply marks the entry in the directory as available, and it still takes just at long to scan the directory afterwards as it did before. This is a known problem with many MTAs handling large amounts of messages, and is one reason why you should use a hashed directory scheme for your mail queue (a la postfix), or you should periodically stop the MTA, move the mail queue directory aside, create a new mail queue directory (with appropriate ownership and permissions), then move what messages may remain from the old queue back into the new one (or fire up queue runners to clear the old queue while the new one is being used for new mail). In MM 2.1.3, the relevant code is in $prefix/Mailman/Queue/Switchboard.py function files() starting at line 204 which is called from $prefix/Mailman/Queue/Runner.py line 89 when subclassed from $prefix/Mailman/Queue/ArchRunner.py Rather than just theorize, feel free to make specific suggestions about the deficiencies and appropriate remedies based on the code being executed. Dare I say it, you could even submit a patch to fix any obvious errors in the code. Mailman could very easily be suffering from the same sort of problem -- once you get a directory with a large number of entries in it, it takes a long time to scan it even if there are only a few files that are currently visible. Same problem, perhaps the same solution? -- Brad Knowles, [EMAIL PROTECTED] They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++): a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI$ P+++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+() DI+() D+(++) G+() e++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++) -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/ r.barrett%40openinfo.co.uk -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] Would like to move or remove some headers
All of our lists are closed and our members are internal; they don't need or want to subscribe or unsubscribe, etc. As it is, the headers and the subscribe/unsubscribe, etc. lines are filling the page. We'd like to either remove them or move them below the message area. Is there a way to do this? Does it require programming? If so where can I hire someone to make the modification? Mike -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Brad Knowles wrote: At 6:21 PM -0500 2003/10/31, Scott Lambert wrote: I haven't looked at the code yet, and probably won't (ENOTIME), but it almost sounds to me like it's not pruning it's list of handled messages and has to walk all of them each time. I would have expected queue handling to get faster as the queue got smaller due to fewer files in the directory that it needs to search through. Maybe it's just a function of the python datastructure being used. If it's using files as the queue mechanism, then deleting a file simply marks the entry in the directory as available, and it still takes just at long to scan the directory afterwards as it did before. If we were talking about more than 10,000 files, I might buy it. But we are talking about 1300 files. Also the processing goes something like O(n), in reverse, slower as it processes the files in the directory. I might buy it staying slow if it started slow but it doesn't. -- Scott LambertKC5MLE Unix SysAdmin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] question about destination address
Im running mailman 2.1.3 at my box, and i need to change a setting related to destination address, ive been reading and trying but i cannot get it working. I have a list called test. when i send a post to this lists, i need that the destination address in the msgs that subscribers receive be the real address and not the list address. Example: my subscriber es [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the list is test. When bill get his mail, i need bill to see that the To: field is [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead [EMAIL PROTECTED] How can i achieve this? Thanks in advance. -- A man in black on a snow white horse, A pointless life has run its course, The red rimmed eyes, the tears still run As he fades into the setting sun -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] Problem with archrunner using large %'s of cpu (read faq archives)
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 21:29, Scott Lambert wrote: On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 12:59:24AM +0100, Brad Knowles wrote: At 6:21 PM -0500 2003/10/31, Scott Lambert wrote: I haven't looked at the code yet, and probably won't (ENOTIME), but it almost sounds to me like it's not pruning it's list of handled messages and has to walk all of them each time. I would have expected queue handling to get faster as the queue got smaller due to fewer files in the directory that it needs to search through. Maybe it's just a function of the python datastructure being used. If it's using files as the queue mechanism, then deleting a file simply marks the entry in the directory as available, and it still takes just at long to scan the directory afterwards as it did before. If we were talking about more than 10,000 files, I might buy it. But we are talking about 1300 files. Also the processing goes something like O(n), in reverse, slower as it processes the files in the directory. I might buy it staying slow if it started slow but it doesn't. To me it sounds like a memory problem. I wonder how fast we can fix it? -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
Re: [Mailman-Users] question about destination address
On Fri, 2003-10-31 at 21:38, Alexis wrote: Im running mailman 2.1.3 at my box, and i need to change a setting related to destination address, ive been reading and trying but i cannot get it working. I have a list called test. when i send a post to this lists, i need that the destination address in the msgs that subscribers receive be the real address and not the list address. Example: my subscriber es [EMAIL PROTECTED], and the list is test. When bill get his mail, i need bill to see that the To: field is [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead [EMAIL PROTECTED] How can i achieve this? Thanks in advance. Read the FAQ and look for VERP (or Personalization). It's laid out in HowTo fashion - step by step. Jon Carnes -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
[Mailman-Users] Re: optionsurl not using full domain
Michael Alberghini wrote: For some reason my new subscriber messages are going out with only my hostname, not the full domain name in the urls. For example the welcome messages tells people to click http://mailbox/mailman/listinfo/galileo instead of http://mailbox.gsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/galileo I can't find a way to set the optionsurl variable to the full domain name. It should be the full domain - I would say there is something set wrong someplace. The web links to the list info page, and to your administrative interface have the same error. I checked a few other lists on the server and they do not have this problem, so it seems to be something that was set or changed for this list. Paul -- Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
