postfix-users October 2010 archive
Main Archive Page > Month Archives  > postfix-users archives
postfix-users: Re: qty hold: logged does.not.equal qty hold queu

Re: qty hold: logged does.not.equal qty hold queue ?

From: Len Conrad <lconrad_at_nospam>
Date: Mon Oct 25 2010 - 13:24:40 GMT
To: postfix users <postfix-users@postfix.org>

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Noel Jones <njones@megan.vbhcs.org>
Reply-To: postfix users <postfix-users@postfix.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 06:16:07 -0500

>On 10/25/2010 4:28 AM, Len Conrad wrote:
>>
>> I'm testing a new filter, so I HOLD matching messages, then inspect them to either release or delete them.
>>
>> egrep -ic "hold: " /var/log/maillog
>> 298
>>
>> but in mailq:
>>
>> mailq | mailq-oneline.pl | egrep -ic "! "
>> 35
>>
>> cross checking:
>>
>> find /var/spool/postfix/hold -type f | wc -l
>> 35
>>
>> In case I forgot I cleaned the queue:
>>
>> egrep -ic "postsuper.*removed" /var/log/maillog
>> 3
>>
>> Why the 250+ diff between HOLD: log lines and hold queue files?
>>
>> Len
>
>Several reasons come to mind...
>Mail can trigger a HOLD rule but be rejected by a later rule.

Why would a HOLD: continue to be processed by other rules?

Isn't HOLD a first-match-wins case?

> If you have multiple HOLD rules they may each create their
>own log entry.

I have a HOLD for per-sender rate limit, and a HOLD for per-IP rate limit.

Again, if a msg is HOLD by a rule/filter, why would other rules/filters see it?

> A recipient rule that triggers HOLD will log
>for each recipient of a multi-recipient message, but will only
>result in one message in the hold queue.

ok

Len