> I can see that doing thinks Mercury doesn't allow could lead to

unexpected results, but it wasn't the mail cache that
> was messed up, it

was the PMM file - verified by reading it on the server. I didn't

examine the cache but from the file
> size it appeared normal, it

certainly wasn't anywhere near the size of the PMM.

> gusq, in

theory the situation you describe can result in conflicts, but as noted

above, my experience has been that
> problems were very rare up to and

including 4.72.

Did you run the MBXMAINT.exe from v4.73 on all of the PMM files?  In v4.72 and earlier there are problems with duplicate message identifiers when using IMAP4 and these can cause all sorts of problems.

I'm running Mercury on XP with Thunderbird as a client via IMAP, and have recent updated to 4.73. After having deleted about 20 mails, the Trash folder (which was empty) now contains just over 400 - somewhere between 12 and 73 copies of each one. I've looked in the .PMM file and they are there, not just a Thunderbird display bug.

There are two client machines and both had Thunderbird logged in to the server at the time of the deletion; a smartphone client was also logged in. I was unable to empty the trash until I'd logged out of the other clients. I found Version 4.72 used to tolerate simultaneous logins; maybe 4.73 doesn't, or perhaps the problem is something else entirely.

Has anyone else seen this kind of behaviour?

Thanks

Chris

> There are two client machines and both had Thunderbird logged in to the server at the time of the deletion; a smartphone client was also
> logged in. I was unable to empty the trash until I'd logged out of the other clients. I found Version 4.72 used to tolerate simultaneous
> logins; maybe 4.73 doesn't, or perhaps the problem is something else entirely.
>
> Has anyone else seen this kind of behaviour?

Yes, when there are multiple connections the the deletions do not EXPUNGE the message on the server, Mercury has never supported deletions when there are multiple connections to an account.  In addition, Thunderbird itself may make multiple connections to the same account unless you restrict Thunderbird to one connection in the Thunderbird setup.  

When you get into this multiple connections type problem with Thunderbird it's quite possible it's local cache can get messed up.

In that case how does the multiple connections issue work in regards to moving messages from one folder to another?  Is this going to be an issue for a user who has a smart phone monitoring the iMap connection and is moving things around with another iMap program on their laptop?

Thanks, Thomas. I was aware that EXPUNGE didn't work with multiple connections, but in practice I've had few problems up to now. The comment in the thread "!Mercury 4.73 IMAP: Deleting mails very erratic" that mails are not always flagged as DELETED suggests an explanation. I think Thunderbird probably hides mail as soon as the DELETE flag is set, and so provided mails were EXPUNGED sooner or later, users didn't notice anything unexpected. I've also seen behaviour that suggests the DELETE flag is being removed on log-out (which may of course be by design) - with 4.73 and two users logged in, mails disappeared from one client when deleted in the other, only to reappear when that client logged off.

I can see that doing thinks Mercury doesn't allow could lead to unexpected results, but it wasn't the mail cache that was messed up, it was the PMM file - verified by reading it on the server. I didn't examine the cache but from the file size it appeared normal, it certainly wasn't anywhere near the size of the PMM.

gusq, in theory the situation you describe can result in conflicts, but as noted above, my experience has been that problems were very rare up to and including 4.72.

Chris

Duplicate post edited to remove it. Don't understand what happened there - I submitted the post, but it was still showing in draft, so I submitted it again and received a response that this was a moderated forum and my post wouldn't appear until it had been reviewed. One copy had, however, appeared. Later I received a mail saying it had been approved, but by the time I looked, it was too late to delete it.

Chris