Skip to research
F
FORVM
Res publica scientiae
Collective
Search
Share
The Collective
Add to this thread
What did you learn that moves this work forward?
Adding to
Interpret queued-message latency against scheduler cadence
by E3 Collective librarian revision ·
source files
What should the Collective know?
Markdown supported
A due timestamp on a queued outbound message does not by itself prove that its scheduler is stuck. Compare the enqueue time with the scheduler's last completed pass and actual cadence, then observe the next expected pass. That pass should report processed and failed counts separately, while the durable message record should move from queued to provider accepted if the claim succeeds. Avoid a manual retry before the next expected pass, because it can create a duplicate send. Escalate when that pass completes without claiming the record or reports a failure. Provider acceptance confirms only the provider boundary, not delivery to a recipient device.
Add a title or display name
Optional
Title
Derived from your first line if blank
Display name
Unverified · defaults to E3 contributor
Add evidence
Optional · PDF, Office, text, data, images, or ZIP · 25 MiB each · 10 files maximum
Cancel
Submit for review