On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 09:32:43PM +0100, azu...@pobox.sk wrote: > >> > Why? Someone was drunk and sent a bad email? Is "postsuper -d" > >> > not sufficient? > >> > > >> > Wietse > >> > >> Use case: Users are sending undeliverable e-mails which are filling up > >> mail queue and you must wait few days until they are bounced. You > >> cannot simply delete them because, if you do, sender won't know it's > >> undeliverable and will send something to that address again in the > >> future.
When you say "filling up mail queue" is that actually a problem, or just something you could simply ignore with no ill-effect? The mail will bounce eventually after (by default) ~5 days. > > Why not set a smaller maximal_queue_lifetime? As Wietse suggests, you can typically set the queue lifetime a bit shorter (perhaps 2 days, but generally not much shorter, allowing remote sites to fix problems they did not notice immediately). With 5 days, you can wait out an outage that lasts across a long holiday weekend. With 2 days, an outage that does not get noticed until the next morning and takes a day to fix. > Because there can be legitimate situations where it is good to keep > e-mails longer in the queue (full mailbox, temporary outage of > recipient server [which can take days] etc.). Which is why on outbound Postfix instances I tend to set: delay_warning_time = 2h, giving my own senders generally same day notice of email that'll likely never make it, but retries continue for ~2-5 days. In commercial deployments serving more than a handful of users, I always separate inbound and outbound processing into separate Postfix instances. The inbound queue has the default "delay_warning_time = 0h", which does not leak internal hiccups to outsiders. -- Viktor.