Oops - my bad. From what I saw, I was under the impression that it didn't do this. (No apparent incoming store being my main clue.)
Sorry for not getting all my facts straight ahead of time... > -----Original Message----- > From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 2:22 PM > To: James Developers List > Subject: Re: Suggestion > > > I'm happy to report James already does this (and actually has > been doing > it since day 1). When messages are received via SMTP, James does not > send a 250 Message received until it is written to disk. > Then as it is > processed, the message is not removed from the spool until it is > successfully processed. Pretty much no matter when you kill > James, it > shuld never lose a message and in certain cases duplicate a > message if a > processing was interrupted half way through. > -- > Serge Knystautas > Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites > http://www.lokitech.com/ > > > Jeff Keyser wrote: > > I would like to make a suggestion that I feel would make > James a little more > > robust. (I would offer to make the change myself, but I'm > not familiar > > enough with the code to do this.) > > > > Here is the potential situation: James receives an e-mail, > and responds to > > the sender that it has been received. James then begins to > process this new > > e-mail, but something happens before it's done - either the computer > > crashes, James crashes, or whatever. This e-mail is lost, > because the only > > copy of it was in memory. > > > > What I would suggest is that James write the e-mail to a > store while it is > > receiving it, before it sends the final response to the > sender. James could > > then use this store as its incoming e-mail queue, and > remove e-mail from it > > after they have been processed. If the computer crashes > before the e-mail > > is written to the store, the sender never gets a final response, and > > (theoretically) holds the e-mail to try again later. If it crashes > > afterwards but before processing is done, James rereads the > e-mail from the > > incoming queue when it restarts, and starts the processing again. > > > > Anyway, it's just a suggestion. > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
