On Wed, 23 Apr 2014, Wilfred van Velzen wrote to mark lewis:

 WvV>> I never heard of such a case, but I don't think many people use 
 WvV>> fastecho concurrently with fmail on the same message base. ;)

 ml> i don't thing concurrencey has anything to do with it... more like 
 ml> JAM bases created and maintained with FE for years being switched 
 ml> to FMail with FE no longer in the picture...

 WvV> That's what I mean. Not exactly at the same time...

understood... but my clarification was "not at all"... only one,
period... namely, starting with FE managed JAM bases and then switching
completely to FMail managed JAM bases using the existing one...

 WvV>> But to be able to do anything with this, I will have to reproduce
 WvV>> it, which means

 ml> one should only need to set up FE, toss messages to JAM bases with 
 ml> FE, then after some time, switch to using FMail for those bases... 
 ml> it might take a while if the problem only appears after bases are 
 ml> over a certain size...

 WvV> I will spend my time on more pressing matters. Although valid, I 
 WvV> don't think this use case has a high chance of occuring too 
 WvV> often... ;)

we don't know and we don't (yet) have any clue as to why it happened...
with my live archivial (3 years retention) setup, i definitely would not
want to switch my main system from FE to FMail if it meant losing 3 years
of posts...

)\/(ark

One of the great tragedies of life is the murder of a beautiful theory by a
gang of brutal facts. --Benjamin Franklin

--- FMail/Win32 1.60