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: Noel Jones <njones_at_nospam>
Date: Mon Oct 25 2010 - 13:38:44 GMT
To: postfix-users@postfix.org

On 10/25/2010 8:24 AM, Len Conrad wrote:
> ---------- 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?
>

HOLD doesn't terminate processing like an OK or REJECT; it's
more like DUNNO, continue. Internally, it just sets a flag
and continues with the next rule.

>> 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?

HOLD doesn't terminate processing like an OK or REJECT; it's
more like DUNNO, continue.

   -- Noel Jones

>
>> 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
>