Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:19:02PM -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote: > I was asking; I didn't know it was a bug originally. :) I thought it > was formerly a master(8)-only setting, whereas now, it can be set > per-daemon with -o. The daemons processed the option too late for it to actually change the log t

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread /dev/rob0
On Thursday 17 September 2009 13:40:56 Wietse Venema wrote: > /dev/rob0: > > On Thursday 17 September 2009 13:02:20 Victor Duchovni wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:59:25PM -0400, fursink wrote: > > > > Would the fact that this is 2.3.3... prevent the transport > > > > from working at all? >

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Wietse Venema
/dev/rob0: > On Thursday 17 September 2009 13:02:20 Victor Duchovni wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:59:25PM -0400, fursink wrote: > > > Would the fact that this is 2.3.3... prevent the transport > > > from working at all? > > > > No, and in fact the transport is almost certainly used, but "-o

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:33:01PM -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Thursday 17 September 2009 13:02:20 Victor Duchovni wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:59:25PM -0400, fursink wrote: > > > Would the fact that this is 2.3.3... prevent the transport > > > from working at all? > > > > No, and in fac

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread /dev/rob0
On Thursday 17 September 2009 13:02:20 Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:59:25PM -0400, fursink wrote: > > Would the fact that this is 2.3.3... prevent the transport > > from working at all? > > No, and in fact the transport is almost certainly used, but "-o > syslog_name" does no

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Wietse Venema
AndrewLong: > > > > Wietse Venema wrote: > > > > You forgot the transport table configuration. Without this, > > Postfix will never use the "slow" transport. > > > > Wietse > > > > /etc/postfix/transport:: > yahoo.com slow: > > followed by postmap hash:/etc/postfix/transport > >

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:20:19PM -0400, fursink wrote: > Then I have to ask, what effect does the "-o syslog_name=postfix-slow" > have in master.cf? > I read an old (2006) thread indicating the override does not work, is > that still true? It works with Postfix ~2.5 and later. When "bottom-pos

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread fursink
>> Than what is the preferred method to verify that a transport is being used >> for the domain it configured for... > > Generally, you don't need to verify this. If the transport table is defined > it is used as advertised. If you absolutely must check: > >    - Send mail to two users that should

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:06:19PM -0400, fursink wrote: > >> related - if slow transport is working, will the log show > >> "postfix/postfix-slow" rather than "postfix/smtp"? > > > > No. > > Than what is the preferred method to verify that a transport is being used > for the domain it configured

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread fursink
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:59:25PM -0400, fursink wrote: > >> Would the fact that this is 2.3.3... prevent the transport from working >> at all? > > No, and in fact the transport is almost certainly used, but "-o > syslog_name" does not wor

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:59:25PM -0400, fursink wrote: > Would the fact that this is 2.3.3... prevent the transport from working > at all? No, and in fact the transport is almost certainly used, but "-o syslog_name" does not work as expected in 2.3.3. Rather, the syslog_name is inherited from t

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread fursink
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:27:45PM -0400, fursink wrote: > >> Sep 17 13:25:55 tmail postfix/smtp[27618]: EBC6F87D49: >> to=, relay=e.mx.mail.yahoo.com[216.39.53.1]:25, >> delay=3.7, delays=0.02/0/0.64/3, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 ok >> di

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 01:27:45PM -0400, fursink wrote: > Sep 17 13:25:55 tmail postfix/smtp[27618]: EBC6F87D49: > to=, relay=e.mx.mail.yahoo.com[216.39.53.1]:25, > delay=3.7, delays=0.02/0/0.64/3, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 ok > dirdel) > Sep 17 13:25:55 tmail postfix/qmgr[27609]: EBC6F87D49: r

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread fursink
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 1:17 PM, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Thursday 17 September 2009 12:11:22 AndrewLong wrote: >> Wietse Venema wrote: >> > You forgot the transport table configuration. Without this, >> > Postfix will never use the "slow" transport. > >> /etc/postfix/transport:: >> yahoo.com       s

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread /dev/rob0
On Thursday 17 September 2009 12:11:22 AndrewLong wrote: > Wietse Venema wrote: > > You forgot the transport table configuration. Without this, > > Postfix will never use the "slow" transport. > /etc/postfix/transport:: > yahoo.com slow: > > followed by postmap hash:/etc/postfix/transport >

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-17 Thread AndrewLong
Wietse Venema wrote: > > You forgot the transport table configuration. Without this, > Postfix will never use the "slow" transport. > > Wietse > /etc/postfix/transport:: yahoo.com slow: followed by postmap hash:/etc/postfix/transport I'm sorry, I should have included that this

Re: (more) slow transport not working

2009-09-16 Thread Wietse Venema
fursink: > I am still unclear on this... > > Despite creating a slow transport for yahoo and verifying that the > unix socket 'slow' exists, it seems that it's not being used. Our > connections to yahoo are still occurring at a rate faster than > specified here in main.cf params and there is no 'p