Repeated messages (was Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com>, Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)townnews(dot)com>, Justin Clift <aa2(at)bigpond(dot)net(dot)au>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Repeated messages (was Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES)
Date: 2001-06-28 16:19:17
Message-ID: 24647.993745157@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com> writes:
> Actually he asked it a week ago (see Jun 22 timestamp in his email). The
> list server keeps regurgitating old messages and resending them. This has
> been the behavior for last 2-3 months, and its hella annoying. I thought
> its just me, but apparently its not.

I think what's been happening a lot lately is:

1. Someone sends a message to a list they're not subscribed to.
majordomo puts it into Marc's "to approve" queue and sends back a
note saying the message is being delayed for administrator approval.

2. Not wanting to wait, the someone subscribes to the target list and
resends his message. Discussion ensues.

3. Some time later, Marc gets around to emptying the approval queue and
allows the original version of the message to be posted.

I agree it's annoying, but I'm not sure what can be done about it.
Running the PG lists takes a lot of Marc's time already --- I don't
think it's reasonable to expect him to check for duplications of this
kind on top of everything else. (And no, I don't want to drop the
non-subscriber restriction. The lists have been wonderfully spam-free
lately, largely because of Marc's filters.)

Anyone have an idea about an automatic solution that wouldn't take any
extra admin time? Maybe, when someone subscribes, automatically drop
any pending messages from that person in the approval queue? That'd
eliminate this kind of duplication, but I'm not sure what the downside
might be, or how much work it'd be to set up. (For "drop" read "return
to sender", anyway...)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mitch Vincent 2001-06-28 16:43:46 Re: Re: useability of apache, PHP, Postgres for real business apps
Previous Message Lincoln Yeoh 2001-06-28 16:01:44 Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES to accept an INCREMENT of functionname(parameters) instead of an integer