------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=428
Tony Finch <dot@???> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |dot@???
--- Comment #14 from Tony Finch <dot@???> 2007-07-30 19:22:28 ---
A rate of 0 is correct for the first message. The essence of the computation
is:
interval = this_time - prev_time;
i_over_p = interval / period;
a = exp(-i_over_p);
new_rate = (1 - a) / i_over_p + a * old_rate;
For the first message, the interval is effectively infinite, so
interval = inf;
i_over_p = inf / period = inf;
a = exp(-i_over_p) = exp(-inf) = 0;
new_rate = (1 - a) / i_over_p + a * old_rate
= 1 / inf + 0 * old_rate
= 0;
This has the advantage that you can set the rate limit arbitrarily low.
I'm not sure whether or not the noupdate in your previous posts is a red
herring. The debugging output you posted is consistent with a stray noupdate. I
can't understand what you are trying to suggest in your last post.
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
