Bitmessage/PyBitmessage-2025-02-27
Archived
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 167 Pull Requests 56 Actions Packages Projects Releases 5 Wiki Activity

If we decrypt a message, we should write the inventory contents to disk #465

New Issue
Closed
opened 2013-09-02 00:56:04 +02:00 by grant-olson · 4 comments
grant-olson commented 2013-09-02 00:56:04 +02:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

My computer died, and I got some duplicate messages in my inbox. I understand why we only periodically write the full inventory to disk, but I think if we successfully decrypt a message, we should write the inventory entry for that item to disk so we don't duplicate in the inbox, or even worse, rebroadcast a mailing list post or otherwise reprocess the message via an external app.

My computer died, and I got some duplicate messages in my inbox. I understand why we only periodically write the full inventory to disk, but I think if we successfully decrypt a message, we should write the inventory entry for that item to disk so we don't duplicate in the inbox, or even worse, rebroadcast a mailing list post or otherwise reprocess the message via an external app.
Atheros1 commented 2013-09-03 06:53:24 +02:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

An excellent idea. I will add it.

An excellent idea. I will add it.
PeterSurda commented 2015-10-18 12:41:53 +02:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

@Atheros1 has this been done?

@Atheros1 has this been done?
PeterSurda commented 2015-11-11 23:47:22 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

I will verify this myself.

I will verify this myself.
PeterSurda commented 2015-12-17 14:55:27 +01:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Copy Link

@grant-olson , I reviewed the code. I think what happened was that objectProcessor processed the message from the inventory twice. The current code will detect this as a duplicate anyway so I don't think you'll have this problem with a recent version. I did some tests a while ago on an unrelated issue, and when you empty your inventory and then PyBitmessage has to refetch it, it won't generate duplicates in you inbox. 0.4.4 already has such detection. It had a bug (it produced false positives), but @Atheros1 fixed it later in the master branch. So I'm not going to try to reproduce this particular issue.

@grant-olson , I reviewed the code. I think what happened was that objectProcessor processed the message from the inventory twice. The current code will detect this as a duplicate anyway so I don't think you'll have this problem with a recent version. I did some tests a while ago on an unrelated issue, and when you empty your inventory and then PyBitmessage has to refetch it, it won't generate duplicates in you inbox. 0.4.4 already has such detection. It had a bug (it produced false positives), but @Atheros1 fixed it later in the master branch. So I'm not going to try to reproduce this particular issue.
This repo is archived. You cannot comment on issues.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
bug
Something isn't working as it's supposed to
build
Related to building or build system
dependencies
Pull requests that update a dependency file
developers
The issue is relevant mainly for developers rather than users
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
New feature
formatting
Code or UI text formatting
invalid
legal
mobile
Frontend for mobile devices (kivy)
obsolete
packaging
performance
protocol
Protocol change
question
refactoring
regression
Some issue, fixed in the past, appears again
security
test
translation
usability
wontfix
No Label
bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone v0.6.0
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
PeterSurda
No Assignees
1 Participants
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: Bitmessage/PyBitmessage-2025-02-27#465
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?