Hi,
Last night I had to change all subscribers to one of my lists to a digest version. I used bin/withlist -l in interactive mode and gave the following python commands:
all = m.GetMembers() for member in all: m.SetUserDigest(member, 1, force=1)
This took a really long time (1635 regular subscribers) and after about 20 minutes I decided to press Ctrl-C cause I was afraid it hung somewhow... this means I wasn't able to do a m.Save() but after checking the number of subscriber was reduced to about 60 so appearantly it did work out... After that I decided to rerun the commands again and this time I waited untill it was finished and did a m.Save() Anyway my point is that now I'm getting some complaints from members about receiving empty digests (it only says the number of posts which should be in there) I'm not sure yet what they are missing but I was wondering if I could have messed things about by interrupting the process w/o a m.Save()? When I look up the subscription options for one of the members who complained I don't see anything weird in there...
-- Regards,
Ricardo
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 12:33:24PM +0200, Ricardo Kustner wrote:
Anyway my point is that now I'm getting some complaints from members about receiving empty digests (it only says the number of posts which should be in there) I'm not sure yet what they are missing but I was wondering if I could have messed things about by interrupting the process w/o a m.Save()?
uh oh please don't tell me that when mailman sends out digests, they travel through the /etc/aliases addresses cause that would mean a neat little perl script I use filters out the MIME digests... :( [I really need this script to keep the digests clean from garbage)... hmm on the other hand it could also be that the digests are handled directly by qrunner so they won't go through the filter so that wouldn't explain the problems...
Regards,
Ricardo
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 01:23:41PM +0200, Ricardo Kustner wrote:
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 12:33:24PM +0200, Ricardo Kustner wrote:
Anyway my point is that now I'm getting some complaints from members about receiving empty digests (it only says the number of posts which should be in there) I'm not sure yet what they are missing but I was wondering if I could have messed things about by interrupting the process w/o a m.Save()?
uh oh please don't tell me that when mailman sends out digests, they travel through the /etc/aliases addresses cause that would mean a neat little perl script I use filters out the MIME digests... :( [I really need this script to keep the digests clean from garbage)... hmm on the other hand it could also be that the digests are handled directly by qrunner so they won't go through the filter so that wouldn't explain the problems...
It depends on the delivery method you chose. If you use the Sendmail module, it'll probably pass it through /etc/aliases. If you use the SMTP module and the localhost as delivery point, it'll pass through /etc/aliases too. It's damned easy to test, though: disable the filter, make a new digest list, subscribe yourself to it, and mail ;)
-- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net>
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
I finally got a bit of time to respond to this thread...
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:41:21AM +0200, Thomas Wouters wrote:
Anyway my point is that now I'm getting some complaints from members about receiving empty digests (it only says the number of posts which should be in there) I'm not sure yet what they are missing but I was wondering if I could have messed things about by interrupting the process w/o a m.Save()? uh oh please don't tell me that when mailman sends out digests, they travel through the /etc/aliases addresses cause that would mean a neat little perl script I It depends on the delivery method you chose. If you use the Sendmail module, it'll probably pass it through /etc/aliases. If you use the SMTP module and the localhost as delivery point, it'll pass through /etc/aliases too. It's damned easy to test, though: disable the filter, make a new digest list, subscribe yourself to it, and mail ;)
After a few days I have to conclude that the problem is probably on the client side... I'm using the SMTPDirect/localhost but the MIME digests are NOT filtered out by the perl script (I changed my own subscription from plain to digest and it arrives perfectly in my mailbox)... One of the complaints was from somebody using an Hotmail account but I doubt that hotmail could have any problems with mime digest (I don't really feel like trying it out with hotmail myself... as a list admin you develop a certain hate feeling towards unreliable erm... free email services ;-( )
OTH I was just thinking that some users are not smart enough to notice that the actual messages are at the bottom of the message as a bunch of icons or whatever way their email client displays mime digest... wouldn't surprise me to be honest...
Regards,
Ricardo
-- International Janet Jackson fanclub called MISS JANET. For more information write to: Miss Janet. P.O.Box 10016, 1001 EA Amsterdam, The Netherlands Email: fanclub@miss-janet.com Check out our website: http://miss-janet.com
On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 12:33:24PM +0200, Ricardo Kustner wrote:
Anyway my point is that now I'm getting some complaints from members about receiving empty digests (it only says the number of posts which should be in there) I'm not sure yet what they are missing but I was wondering if I could have messed things about by interrupting the process w/o a m.Save()? When I look up the subscription options for one of the members who complained I don't see anything weird in there...
Did you exit the withlist between the two tries ? You might have screwed up one (1) of the subscribers, but definately not more of them. If you exited the withlist without doing m.Save(), nothing happened because of it. If you didn't exit, but re-did the for loop, the changes you'd made would have been saved by the m.Save() at the end, but most of those people would've been set to digest. Only the one that was being processed when you pressed ^C *might* be screwed up.
-- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net>
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
"RK" == Ricardo Kustner <ricardo@rixhq.nu> writes:
RK> This took a really long time (1635 regular subscribers) and
RK> after about 20 minutes I decided to press Ctrl-C cause I was
RK> afraid it hung somewhow... this means I wasn't able to do a
RK> m.Save() but after checking the number of subscriber was
RK> reduced to about 60 so appearantly it did work out...The reason why it took so long, /and/ the reason why most of your subscribers actually got digestered is the same: SetUserDigest() does a self.Save() after each call. As Thomas says, the worst that you could have done would be to mess up one subscriber (the one you ^C'd), but even there, you likely would have only reverted the change in that subscriber's option. I don't see how that could cause empty digests though.
Now, one question is whether SetUserDigest() should do a Save() after each call. I think in all normal usage, SetUserDigest() will be wrapped in a try/finally to ensure that the list is saved. OTOH, there probably isn't any CGI way to set more than about 30 subscribers options, and even then, I'll bet the typical case sets only one or a small few, so the extra writes don't hurt too badly.
That's not the case in withlist. First, you're using it to mass configure lots of users so the extra writes are killing you. But then again, it made most of your changes go through. I'm inclined to ditch the Save() at the end of SetUserDigest() at the expense of losing your changes if you quit withlist with unsaved changes.
"RK" == Ricardo Kustner <ricardo@rixhq.nu> writes:
RK> uh oh please don't tell me that when mailman sends out
RK> digests, they travel through the /etc/aliases addresses cause
RK> that would mean a neat little perl script I use filters out
RK> the MIME digests... :( [I really need this script to keep the
RK> digests clean from garbage)...This would be my first suspicion (and not just 'cause it's perl <wink>)! The empty digests, are they MIME digests? If plain text, maybe they're still tripping up your script. Thomas outlines a good plan of first attack!
-Barry
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 05:13:05AM -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
That's not the case in withlist. First, you're using it to mass configure lots of users so the extra writes are killing you. But then again, it made most of your changes go through. I'm inclined to ditch the Save() at the end of SetUserDigest() at the expense of losing your changes if you quit withlist with unsaved changes.
I contend that that is a feature, not a bug.
How would you 'undo', otherwise? :-)
Cheers, -- jra
Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Baylink The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 804 5015
participants (4)
-
barry＠digicool.com -
Jay R. Ashworth -
Ricardo Kustner -
Thomas Wouters