Something about this scenario doesn’t seem right. First of all, I don’t know how I could possibly reply too fast by email, but so it doesn’t even seem like a reasonable thing to block given the latency of email. And how could I reply in any faster than 5 seconds?
I’m guessing the issue is because:
- emails are collected by polling
- several emails are collected via POP3 at the same time
- you sent several emails that when processed in a queue registered as posting too quickly.
6 „Gefällt mir“
Yeah, that seems the likely culprit. But that polling queue shouldn’t be the fault of the user, no? Should email processing be exempted from the rate limit? (Or at least set much higher?)
1 „Gefällt mir“
It should probably use the times on the emails themselves to check the frequency of replies.
6 „Gefällt mir“
Yeah, that sounds sane.
That is super duper hard to do, not feasible at all the way rate limits are implemented.
I think the simplest thing to do here @zogstrip is to queue the post for processing in N (30) seconds if you hit a rate limit, then if it tries N times (3) then fail out.
That way its pretty easy to implement and will not involve a lot of complicated bypasses to rate limits.
4 „Gefällt mir“
Note, we still want to fix this, it is not easy.
Our hosted customers no longer have this problem since emails are processed immediately and not in 5 minute batches.
6 „Gefällt mir“
Is this something that we mere mortals can configure? 
2 „Gefällt mir“
Unfortunately no, since we’re running our own email server in order to get around this, so it’s really a matter of infrastructure, not basic configuration.
3 „Gefällt mir“
@zogstrip I would love to see this fixed for 1.6, it’s quite harsh when it happens.
1 „Gefällt mir“
Ok, let’s try this 
https://github.com/discourse/discourse/commit/51322a46b3fabab11cfa8f29ac4f386d8227aedf
6 „Gefällt mir“
This topic was automatically closed after 3 days. New replies are no longer allowed.