[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Serious flaw in ActionScheduler::moveMessage()
From:       Don Sanders <sanders () kde ! org>
Date:       2005-12-09 6:52:42
Message-ID: 200512091652.43101.sanders () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thursday 08 December 2005 06:43, Andreas Gungl wrote:> Hi, I think I've finally fixed the async \
filtering. I want to sum> up the fixes to keep you up-to-date:>> 1) Some parts were guarded by an "#if 0" \
but were needed to get the> threadweaver going.> 2) Changes to a message made in external filters were \
not> recognized in subsequent filters (filter rules).> 3) Modifications in external filters which made a \
message loosing> the X-KMail-Filtered header lead to a crash.>> As far as I have tested (and I did many \
tests in the last two days)> the async filtering works quite stable now. If you still encounter> strange \
effects, please let me know. This is great news. Thanks very much for caring.
BTW I read your previous message about this bug depending on default sa behavior. Thanks for that info.
> I've ported the changes to trunk. However I wonder if it would make> sense to move some of the \
> actionscheduler functionality into> threadweaver jobs to make the filtering of a message more atomic> \
> (but still in the background).
(I think Till actually was thinking about dropping use of threadweaver).
Not sure what you mean by more atomic. The action scheduler creates a new message puts that into the \
destination folder and then removes the original message.  I guess you could end up with a duplicated \
message if the timing of a crash was just right. But I can't see how using threadweaver would solve that. \
There are two main outstanding concerns I have. 1) Sometimes imap messages aren't filtered successfully \
(due to timeouts or whatever) and are left in the inbox. So I would like to add some logic to check for \
these left over messages and do a second pass to filter them. 2) Several years ago we got bug reports \
about losing mail when KMail crashes. So I put in fsyncs that are applied everytime a message is added to \
a folder. This had the unfortunate side effect of making KMail more blocking during filtering.
> Perhaps we can discuss some issues> during the Osnabrück meeting.
(I don't think I'll be there.)
Don Sanders._______________________________________________KMail developers mailing \
listKMail-devel@kde.orghttps://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail-devel


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]