> >>I have now tried to downgrade to 2.2.0, and I cannot reproduce the
> >>effect there (only tried filerepositories on this version).
> >
> >This is strange because I experienced exactly the same
> identical issue.
> >
> I never such issue with file repositories in my company production
> syste
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
I have now tried to downgrade to 2.2.0, and I cannot
reproduce the effect there (only tried filerepositories on
this version).
This is strange because I experienced exactly the same identical issue.
I never such issue with file repositories in my company produ
I at least cannot reproduce the behaviour, which lead to this patch any
longer.
I will do some more tests, and report if any anomalies occur.
--Søren
On Wednesday 07 September 2005 12:53, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> I just committed my patch to AvalonMailRepository.
>
> IMHO this is a critical chan
I just committed my patch to AvalonMailRepository.
IMHO this is a critical change and we should test it a lot before the
release.
I'm now trying the same chages in the JDBCMailRepository to see if this
removes the "delay".
Stefano
> > I also tried using Derby/db on trunk, and saw "just" the del
> I have now tried to downgrade to 2.2.0, and I cannot
> reproduce the effect there (only tried filerepositories on
> this version).
This is strange because I experienced exactly the same identical issue.
> I also tried using Derby/db on trunk, and saw "just" the delay.
This is "known".
> I w
I have now tried to downgrade to 2.2.0, and I cannot reproduce the effect
there (only tried filerepositories on this version).
I also tried using Derby/db on trunk, and saw "just" the delay.
I will try out your patch.
--Søren
On Wednesday 07 September 2005 11:30, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> > > C
> > Can you try downgrading to 2.2.0 and verify wether the
> issue is there
> > or not?
>
> Will do that today.
>
> > Can you try using db/derby to check wether the issue is
> there or not?
> >
>
> Sure.
I'm testing a patch to both JDBC and Avalon repositories.
It seems working better than b
On Tuesday 06 September 2005 15:25, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> > > I'm experiencing spooling issues with file repositories too.
> >
> > Well, I haven't until now :-(
>
> Can you try downgrading to 2.2.0 and verify wether the issue is there or
> not?
Will do that today.
> Can you try using db/derby
On Tuesday 06 September 2005 15:12, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> > I am having trouble with the JamesSpoolManager in the trunk.
> > I experience mails hanging in the spool, it looks like the
> > offending piece of code is the return statement in line 418.
> > The reason I suspect that line is that I ca
> > > I'm experiencing spooling issues with file repositories too.
> > Actually, I have occassionally seen the same symptom with JDBC, too.
> Simple delay of messages or full hangs of single messages?
Just the simple delay.
As an aside, we need to make sure that dbfile is working with Derby. It
> > Soren wrote:
> > > I am having trouble with the JamesSpoolManager in the trunk.
> > > I experience mails hanging in the spool, it looks like
> the offending
> > > piece of code is the return statement in line 418.
>
> To be clear, that is the return statement in
> process(MailImpl) that doe
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> Soren wrote:
> > I am having trouble with the JamesSpoolManager in the trunk.
> > I experience mails hanging in the spool, it looks like the
> > offending piece of code is the return statement in line 418.
To be clear, that is the return statement in process(MailImpl) tha
> > I'm experiencing spooling issues with file repositories too.
>
> Well, I haven't until now :-(
Can you try downgrading to 2.2.0 and verify wether the issue is there or
not?
Can you try using db/derby to check wether the issue is there or not?
My tests results are that filerepositories have t
> I am having trouble with the JamesSpoolManager in the trunk.
> I experience mails hanging in the spool, it looks like the
> offending piece of code is the return statement in line 418.
> The reason I suspect that line is that I cannot reproduce the
> effect if I remove the line.
If you remove
On Tuesday 06 September 2005 14:59, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am having trouble with the JamesSpoolManager in the trunk.
> > I experience mails hanging in the spool, it looks like the
> > offending piece of code is the return statement in line 418.
> > The reason I suspect that line
> Hi,
>
> I am having trouble with the JamesSpoolManager in the trunk.
> I experience mails hanging in the spool, it looks like the
> offending piece of code is the return statement in line 418.
> The reason I suspect that line is that I cannot reproduce the
> effect if I remove the line.
>
>
Hi,
I am having trouble with the JamesSpoolManager in the trunk.
I experience mails hanging in the spool, it looks like the offending piece of
code is the return statement in line 418. The reason I suspect that line is
that I cannot reproduce the effect if I remove the line.
Have anyone seen so
17 matches
Mail list logo
