Milter-greylist

>   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot write dum=
> pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
>   EM": Bad file number
>   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot write dum=
> pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
>   EM": Bad file number

Did this message really appear twice? I'm guessing, but perhaps you're
seeing a threading problem. I doubt it's healthy for more than one
thread to use the same tempfile name. Perhaps you had three threads
generate the same name, and when one of them closed the file descriptor
you got this message from the other two.

Cheers,

	- Joel

Joel Reicher <joel@...> wrote:

> >   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot write dum=
> > pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
> >   EM": Bad file number
> >   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot write dum=
> > pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
> >   EM": Bad file number
> 
> Did this message really appear twice? I'm guessing, but perhaps you're
> seeing a threading problem. I doubt it's healthy for more than one
> thread to use the same tempfile name. Perhaps you had three threads
> generate the same name, and when one of them closed the file descriptor
> you got this message from the other two.

Same message ID but different thread? It looks odd...

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
manu@...

manu@... wrote:
 > Joel Reicher wrote:
 > 
 > > >   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot write dum=
 > > > pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
 > > >   EM": Bad file number
 > > >   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot write dum=
 > > > pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
 > > >   EM": Bad file number
 > > 
 > > Did this message really appear twice? I'm guessing, but perhaps you're
 > > seeing a threading problem. I doubt it's healthy for more than one
 > > thread to use the same tempfile name. Perhaps you had three threads
 > > generate the same name, and when one of them closed the file descriptor
 > > you got this message from the other two.
 > 
 > Same message ID but different thread? It looks odd...

It could simply be a configuration issue with his syslog.
In fact it's pretty easy to mess up the config so you get
duplicate messages to the same file.  I don't think it's
related to the actual problem.

Best regards
   Oliver

-- 
Oliver Fromme,  secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing
Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd
Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author
and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way.

(On the statement print "42 monkeys" + "1 snake":)  By the way,
both perl and Python get this wrong.  Perl gives 43 and Python
gives "42 monkeys1 snake", when the answer is clearly "41 monkeys
and 1 fat snake".        -- Jim Fulton

> manu@... wrote:
>  > Joel Reicher wrote:
>  > 
>  > > >   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot writ
> e dum=
>  > > > pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
>  > > >   EM": Bad file number
>  > > >   Dec 10 02:17:57  milter-greylist: [ID 525239 mail.error] cannot writ
> e dum=
>  > > > pfile "/var/milter-greylist/greylist.db-XXiSa4
>  > > >   EM": Bad file number
>  > > 
>  > > Did this message really appear twice? I'm guessing, but perhaps you're
>  > > seeing a threading problem. I doubt it's healthy for more than one
>  > > thread to use the same tempfile name. Perhaps you had three threads
>  > > generate the same name, and when one of them closed the file descriptor
>  > > you got this message from the other two.
>  > 
>  > Same message ID but different thread? It looks odd...
> 
> It could simply be a configuration issue with his syslog.
> In fact it's pretty easy to mess up the config so you get
> duplicate messages to the same file.  I don't think it's
> related to the actual problem.

You might be right, but the problem seems very strange to me.

I assume the OP is using the latest stable release, and that
code reads

        if ((dumpfd = mkstemp(newdumpfile)) == -1) {
                mg_log(LOG_ERR, "mkstemp(\"%s\") failed: %s",
                    newdumpfile, strerror(errno));
                exit(EX_OSERR);
        }

        if ((dump = fdopen(dumpfd, "w")) == NULL) {
                mg_log(LOG_ERR, "cannot write dumpfile \"%s\": %s",
                    newdumpfile, strerror(errno));
                exit(EX_OSERR);
        }

So the fdopen() is failing, but it's preceded by a mkstemp() that
succeeds.

What are the possible explanations for such a situation?

Cheers,

	- Joel

Joel Reicher wrote:
 > [...]
 > So the fdopen() is failing, but it's preceded by a mkstemp() that
 > succeeds.
 > 
 > What are the possible explanations for such a situation?

A libc that doesn't match the operating system.  :-)

If I read his latest mail correctly, he has linked the
program with a libc from Sol10 and is trying to run that
under Sol8.  I'm not surprised that such a setup breaks
in strange ways.

Best regards
   Oliver

-- 
Oliver Fromme,  secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing
Dienstleistungen mit Schwerpunkt FreeBSD: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd
Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author
and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way.

I suggested holding a "Python Object Oriented Programming Seminar",
but the acronym was unpopular.
        -- Joseph Strout