Thread: Weird mailing list bounce
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message I received this strange bounce when posting to the -general mailing list a couple weeks ago. Looks like it made it to the mailing list, but the box after that rejected it because of a "fail[ed] syntax check". Unfortunately, it gives no details as to what that actually means, and if the problem is with my headers or the ones majordomo added. Anyone have clues or ideas on how to diagnose? ==Begin forwarded message== From: Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@zql.com> To: greg@turnstep.com Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender Date: 8:28 PM on Wednesday, February 08, 2012 X-Failed-Recipients: pgsql-general@postgresql.org This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: pgsql-general@postgresql.org SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: host makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125]:550 Message headers fail syntax check ------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------ Return-path: <greg@turnstep.com> Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost) by zql.com with smtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <greg@turnstep.com>) id 1RvIoG-0000nu-GY; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:28:28 -0500 From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-PG-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--)X-Mailing-List: pgsql-general List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general> List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>List-ID: <pgsql-general.postgresql.org> List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org>List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-general@postgresql.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-general>AlekseyTsalolikhin <atsaloli.tech@gmail.com> CC: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-PG-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--)X-Mailing-List: pgsql-general List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general> List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>List-ID: <pgsql-general.postgresql.org> List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org>List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-general@postgresql.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-general>AlekseyTsalolikhin <atsaloli.tech@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] phantom long-running query (check_postgres.pl reports a long-running query, but the database logsdon`t show it) X-PGP-Key: 2529 DF6A B8F7 9407 E944 45B4 BC9B 9067 1496 4AC8 X-Request-PGP: http://www.biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 In-Reply-To: <CA+jMWocErE4Ek3qpY-DGwiSKqckPZtZhv4iAYX5tGX1tfeRXxA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 01:28:28 -0000 X-Mailer: JoyMail 2.4.0 Message-ID: <42ce54325a082b7437d6d7241c8ab4a3@biglumber.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 ... > POSTGRES_QUERY_TIME WARNING: (host:xxx) longest query: 264s > (database:xxx PID:xxx port:xxx address:xxx username:xxx) ... > postgres log showed other long-running queries, but nothing over 48s. > > It's really interesting why the database server log does not show this query. It's not in the logs because it hasn't stopped running yet. Once it finishes, it will appear in the logs. You need to query pg_stat_database to see what query it is. Remember that check_postgres looks at things happening right now, it is not a historical tool. - -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/ PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201202082027 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAk8zISMACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjy1wCg3mQHshSbOY7fDOK5YP/j2lqS 8qIAoML2jObVcNrIRwZWAgnOAZK58X/X =kPb3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201202190809 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAk9A9J0ACgkQvJuQZxSWSsigSACg99a3MqmiIxZcjdcLEMa2cyck RPYAn0MtYhLgUz1uezcUGUbEgwOKIxpn =UD4m -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 02/19/2012 02:11 PM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: > > I received this strange bounce when posting to the -general > mailing list a couple weeks ago. Looks like it made it to > the mailing list, but the box after that rejected it because > of a "fail[ed] syntax check". Unfortunately, it gives no > details as to what that actually means, and if the problem > is with my headers or the ones majordomo added. Anyone have > clues or ideas on how to diagnose? this mail was rejected by one of the (newish) inbound relays for postgresql.org, the problem with diagnosing this in detail is that the message is very old. We don't actually have logs going back 10 generations and you sent in the complaint like a day too late :( However if the forwarded bounce is unedited it looks extremely strange with all the interleaved header(and mime declaration)-stuff on the CC and the second Cc line (note the difference casing). I would strongly suspect something tinkered with those headers but we don't have enough data to diagnose this fully though :( Stefan > > ==Begin forwarded message== > > From: Mail Delivery System <Mailer-Daemon@zql.com> > To: greg@turnstep.com > Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender > Date: 8:28 PM on Wednesday, February 08, 2012 > X-Failed-Recipients: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. > > A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its > recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: > > pgsql-general@postgresql.org > SMTP error from remote mail server after end of data: > host makus.postgresql.org [98.129.198.125]: 550 Message headers fail syntax check > > ------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------ > > Return-path: <greg@turnstep.com> > Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost) > by zql.com with smtp (Exim 4.68) > (envelope-from <greg@turnstep.com>) > id 1RvIoG-0000nu-GY; Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:28:28 -0500 > From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com> > To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-PG-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--)X-Mailing-List: pgsql-general List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general> List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>List-ID: <pgsql-general.postgresql.org> List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org>List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-general@postgresql.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-general>AlekseyTsalolikhin <atsaloli.tech@gmail.com> > CC: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@postgresql.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-PG-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--)X-Mailing-List: pgsql-general List-Archive: <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general> List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=help>List-ID: <pgsql-general.postgresql.org> List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org>List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-general@postgresql.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=sub%20pgsql-general>AlekseyTsalolikhin <atsaloli.tech@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] phantom long-running query (check_postgres.pl reports a long-running query, but the database logsdon`t show it) > X-PGP-Key: 2529 DF6A B8F7 9407 E944 45B4 BC9B 9067 1496 4AC8 > X-Request-PGP: http://www.biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 > In-Reply-To: <CA+jMWocErE4Ek3qpY-DGwiSKqckPZtZhv4iAYX5tGX1tfeRXxA@mail.gmail.com> > Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 01:28:28 -0000 > X-Mailer: JoyMail 2.4.0 > Message-ID: <42ce54325a082b7437d6d7241c8ab4a3@biglumber.com> > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > > ... >> POSTGRES_QUERY_TIME WARNING: (host:xxx) longest query: 264s >> (database:xxx PID:xxx port:xxx address:xxx username:xxx) > ... >> postgres log showed other long-running queries, but nothing over 48s. > >> It's really interesting why the database server log does not show this query. > > It's not in the logs because it hasn't stopped running yet. Once > it finishes, it will appear in the logs. You need to query > pg_stat_database to see what query it is. > > Remember that check_postgres looks at things happening right now, > it is not a historical tool. >
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 > this mail was rejected by one of the (newish) inbound relays for > postgresql.org, the problem with diagnosing this in detail is that the > message is very old. We don't actually have logs going back 10 > generations and you sent in the complaint like a day too late :( > However if the forwarded bounce is unedited it looks extremely strange > with all the interleaved header(and mime declaration)-stuff on the CC > and the second Cc line (note the difference casing). > I would strongly suspect something tinkered with those headers but we > don't have enough data to diagnose this fully though :( Fair enough, I will forward it sooner if it happens again. If this is not the best place to report it, let me know. Yes, the CC is odd. Also odd that I've been sending mail without problems for well over ten years until this. :) - -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201202202201 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iEYEAREDAAYFAk9DCQcACgkQvJuQZxSWSsh87gCffOZJXXd7HIyxfCEh5xklSFLI 3WMAn0uDB+b4NUCHpihgiEWcisyNRDaS =hTJX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Excerpts from Greg Sabino Mullane's message of mar feb 21 03:02:13 UTC 2012: > > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > > this mail was rejected by one of the (newish) inbound relays for > > postgresql.org, the problem with diagnosing this in detail is that the > > message is very old. We don't actually have logs going back 10 > > generations and you sent in the complaint like a day too late :( > > However if the forwarded bounce is unedited it looks extremely strange > > with all the interleaved header(and mime declaration)-stuff on the CC > > and the second Cc line (note the difference casing). > > I would strongly suspect something tinkered with those headers but we > > don't have enough data to diagnose this fully though :( > > Fair enough, I will forward it sooner if it happens again. If this is > not the best place to report it, let me know. Yes, the CC is odd. > Also odd that I've been sending mail without problems for well over > ten years until this. :) "Without problems" is on the eye of the beholder. I've seen weird-looking header lines in list mail, from you specifically, several times over the years. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support