On Fri, 11 Feb 2000, Dave Sill wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> False. Mail will not be lost if if rename() or link() (depending on > > > >Who said anything about the message already being on the filesystem? > > If it's not, then qmail hasn't accepted responsibility for delivering > the message, so the sender, either local or remote, should resend it. As far as Qmail knows, the message has been written out.
- Re: qmail on FFS with softupdates Len Budney
- Re: qmail on FFS with softupdates cmikk
- Re: qmail on FFS with softupdates Andre Oppermann
- Re: qmail on FFS with softupdates Jeff Hayward
- Re: egg on MY face Len Budney
- Re: Journalling and email loss Anthony DeBoer
- Re: Journalling and email loss Pavel Kankovsky
- Re: Journalling and email loss Len Budney
- Re: Journalling and email loss Pavel Kankovsky
- Re: Egg on my face Dave Sill
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... Sam
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... David Dyer-Bennet
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... Bruno Wolff III
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... Andre Oppermann
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... David Dyer-Bennet
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... Russell Nelson
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... Magnus Bodin
- Re: OT: fsync semantics (was Re: Linux ... Andre Oppermann
- Re: Linux kernel turning for mail perfo... Len Budney
- Re: Logging information about each email. Bill Parker
- Re: Logging information about each email. Chris Johnson
