> I will (1) run (tomorrow or Monday) v2.1.1a5 with <deliveryThreads> set to > 1, and (2) later on with <deliveryThreads> set back to a higher > value, just > to help understand what happens and to test the fix.
Noel, for your information: This morning I ran v2.1.1a5 with <deliveryThreads> set to 1 for 4 hours, and I didn't get any ConcurrentModificationException: everything was OK. This afternoon I ran 2.1.1a5 with <deliveryThreads> set to 5 for 3 hours, and I got ConcurrentModificationException 7 times, until the CPU problem came back again, and ConcurrentModificationException started to appear at a high rate. This time the CPU problem took much longer to occur, compared with v2.1. Now I switched back to <deliveryThreads> set to 1, as I don't need any higher value, and I will stick with that. If you want me to do any other testing let me know; in the meantime thanks for the help! Vincenzo P.S. for v2.1.1a5: 1) I'm happy to see NNTP support working, as we are going to use it. 2) Small bug found: the "hh" part of the log file names generated with the new rotation mechanism (very nice to have) is not 24 hours based but 12 hours based, as in "mailet-2003-02-03-05-14.log" for example, that should have been "mailet-2003-02-03-17-14.log" instead. Bye again --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
