Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 20:50:10 +0100 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>In general, there's no guarantee that mail will arrive in the order
>that it was sent or be processed by LISTSERV in the order it was
>received. So it's not good to depend on that.
Maybe, I did not explain clearly enough what I have done. Therefore,
I will describe my test in more detail. I have sent the following commands
in *one* single message to our local [log in to unmask]:
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
get sigi-l (header
unlock sigi-l
The result which was sent by LISTSERV is interesting...
---
From MAILER-DAEMON Wed Feb 02 20:10:42 2000
Return-path: <>
Envelope-to: [log in to unmask]
Delivery-date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 20:10:42 +0100
Received: from mailgate.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de (mailgate.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.64.97])
by mailhost.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1)
id 12G5Ai-0005oD-00; Wed, 02 Feb 2000 20:10:36 +0100
Received: from uni-karlsruhe.de ([log in to unmask] [129.13.64.210])
by mailgate.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #2)
id 12G5AD-0006CL-08; Wed, 02 Feb 2000 20:10:05 +0100
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 20:10:05 +0100
From: "L-Soft list server at Universitaet Karlsruhe (1.8d)"
<[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: lock
To: LISTSERV Administrator <[log in to unmask]>
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
Status: RO
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list has been unlocked. It had been locked since 100/02/0 20:10
by LISTSERV Administrator <[log in to unmask]>.
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list is not locked.
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list is not locked.
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list is not locked.
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list is not locked.
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list is not locked.
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list is not locked.
> get sigi-l (header
File "SIGI-L LIST" has been mailed to you under separate cover.
The SIGI-L list has been locked. Do not attempt to add recipients "on the
fly" when you send back the header; if you want to make changes to the
recipients list, you must use the regular GET command.
> unlock sigi-l
The SIGI-L list is not locked.
Summary of resource utilization
-------------------------------
CPU time: 0.120 sec
Overhead CPU: 0.120 sec
CPU model: 9000/871
Job origin: [log in to unmask]
---
I performed this test in a similar way with three lists on *three* different
LISTSERVs:
LISTSERV 1.8d on OpenVMS V7.1-1H2 (list AMALGAM)
LISTSERV 1.8d on Windows NT 4.0 (list LYME-L)
LISTSERV 1.8d on HP-UX B.10.20 (list SIGI-L on our local LISTSERV)
Only our local LISTSERV on HP-UX B.10.20 showed this strange synchronization
problem.
Siegfried
|
|
|