Thread: Problem with archives -- mail gets lost
This is a dead link, but should link to a post to pgsql-hackers sent a little while ago: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAM3SWZScpWzQ-7EJC77vwqzZ1GO8GNmURQ1QqDQ3wRn7AbW1Cg@mail.gmail.com I can even see my mail listed here, with a dead link to above: http://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers/since/201510120000/ The subject of the mail is "INSERT ... ON CONFLICT documentation clean-up patch". What's up with this? Thanks -- Regards, Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com> wrote:
-- This is a dead link, but should link to a post to pgsql-hackers sent a
little while ago:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAM3SWZScpWzQ-7EJC77vwqzZ1GO8GNmURQ1QqDQ3wRn7AbW1Cg@mail.gmail.com
I can even see my mail listed here, with a dead link to above:
http://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers/since/201510120000/
The subject of the mail is "INSERT ... ON CONFLICT documentation
clean-up patch". What's up with this?
That link works fine for me.
Is there any chance that you actually tried navigating to that link *before* the mail actually showed up on the list in your second page? It's normal with a short delay (usually seconds) after the email gets to majordomo before it's in the archives. At that point it should not be visible on either of those two links, but if you hit the first link it would cache the 404 response for a while. Once the email arrived, the second link would be refreshed but not the first once (since at the time you got to the first link initially, we did not know which thread to expire, as we had not seen the mail yet).
Could that be the explanation?
On 12 October 2015 at 10:15, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com> wrote:This is a dead link, but should link to a post to pgsql-hackers sent a
little while ago:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAM3SWZScpWzQ-7EJC77vwqzZ1GO8GNmURQ1QqDQ3wRn7AbW1Cg@mail.gmail.com
I can even see my mail listed here, with a dead link to above:
http://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers/since/201510120000/
The subject of the mail is "INSERT ... ON CONFLICT documentation
clean-up patch". What's up with this?That link works fine for me.Is there any chance that you actually tried navigating to that link *before* the mail actually showed up on the list in your second page? It's normal with a short delay (usually seconds) after the email gets to majordomo before it's in the archives. At that point it should not be visible on either of those two links, but if you hit the first link it would cache the 404 response for a while. Once the email arrived, the second link would be refreshed but not the first once (since at the time you got to the first link initially, we did not know which thread to expire, as we had not seen the mail yet).Could that be the explanation?
I clicked on the first link a minute ago, got 404. Clicked on the second, seen the email link, clicked, got email. Went to the browser tab with the first link, refreshed, and I had the email. Maybe a kind of caching problems?
--
regards Szymon Lipiński
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Szymon Lipiński <mabewlun@gmail.com> wrote:
On 12 October 2015 at 10:15, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com> wrote:This is a dead link, but should link to a post to pgsql-hackers sent a
little while ago:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAM3SWZScpWzQ-7EJC77vwqzZ1GO8GNmURQ1QqDQ3wRn7AbW1Cg@mail.gmail.com
I can even see my mail listed here, with a dead link to above:
http://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers/since/201510120000/
The subject of the mail is "INSERT ... ON CONFLICT documentation
clean-up patch". What's up with this?That link works fine for me.Is there any chance that you actually tried navigating to that link *before* the mail actually showed up on the list in your second page? It's normal with a short delay (usually seconds) after the email gets to majordomo before it's in the archives. At that point it should not be visible on either of those two links, but if you hit the first link it would cache the 404 response for a while. Once the email arrived, the second link would be refreshed but not the first once (since at the time you got to the first link initially, we did not know which thread to expire, as we had not seen the mail yet).Could that be the explanation?Hi,I clicked on the first link a minute ago, got 404. Clicked on the second, seen the email link, clicked, got email. Went to the browser tab with the first link, refreshed, and I had the email. Maybe a kind of caching problems?
Yes, it could be - there are three different cache servers (in different datacenters) that could have slightly different origin times.
We should probably have a (much) shorter cache time for 404 responses on actual messages -- but I'd first like to figure out how it got in there in the first place. The scenario outlined above would make that happen - if that's not what happened it must be something else, but I'm not sure what. It seems highly unlikely that a search engine for example would randomly hit a messageid before we actually had it, since there would be nothing linking to it...
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > That link works fine for me. > > Is there any chance that you actually tried navigating to that link *before* > the mail actually showed up on the list in your second page? It's normal > with a short delay (usually seconds) after the email gets to majordomo > before it's in the archives. At that point it should not be visible on > either of those two links, but if you hit the first link it would cache the > 404 response for a while. Once the email arrived, the second link would be > refreshed but not the first once (since at the time you got to the first > link initially, we did not know which thread to expire, as we had not seen > the mail yet). > > Could that be the explanation? Yes, it could be. It was not seconds, but it was certainly minutes. And yes, the link works now, although I still saw a 404 well after an hour of the post being sent. The thing about this series of actions is that it's kind of natural. For example, if I post a new patch into the commitfest app, I still paste in the message-id. I probably also click the link quickly, out of habit. This is the first time I've seen this problem, though. -- Regards, Peter Geoghegan
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> That link works fine for me.
>
> Is there any chance that you actually tried navigating to that link *before*
> the mail actually showed up on the list in your second page? It's normal
> with a short delay (usually seconds) after the email gets to majordomo
> before it's in the archives. At that point it should not be visible on
> either of those two links, but if you hit the first link it would cache the
> 404 response for a while. Once the email arrived, the second link would be
> refreshed but not the first once (since at the time you got to the first
> link initially, we did not know which thread to expire, as we had not seen
> the mail yet).
>
> Could that be the explanation?
Yes, it could be. It was not seconds, but it was certainly minutes.
And yes, the link works now, although I still saw a 404 well after an
hour of the post being sent.
The thing about this series of actions is that it's kind of natural.
For example, if I post a new patch into the commitfest app, I still
paste in the message-id. I probably also click the link quickly, out
of habit. This is the first time I've seen this problem, though.
Apologies for the long delay in dealing with this.
I've just deployed a config change that will cache a 404 response to a missing mail for 1 minute instead of 4 hours. That means if you get the 404 when you do what you explained above, just wait a max of 1 minute and it should show up.
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > Apologies for the long delay in dealing with this. > > I've just deployed a config change that will cache a 404 response to a > missing mail for 1 minute instead of 4 hours. That means if you get the 404 > when you do what you explained above, just wait a max of 1 minute and it > should show up. Thanks. -- Peter Geoghegan