Charles Marcus a écrit : > On 1/11/2009, Victor Duchovni (victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com) wrote: >>> First question... is there a reason that none of the *_limit_maps are >>> included in proxy_read_maps by default? I.e., maybe doing this is not >>> recommended? > >> Ask the maintainers of the unofficial VDA quota patch. > > I didn't know I was using that patch, but considering your reply, > apparently the *_limit_maps are a sure sign of it? I'm on gentoo, and > have the vda USE flag explicitly DISABLED... > > Hmmm... closer examination shows that I am not actually using this patch > OR table, since it (the Table) doesn't show up in postconf -n output, > even though it is specified in main.cf.
so you probably don't use the patch. you can convince yourself using: # postconf -d|grep limit_maps (it should return nothing). More generally, to see whether a parameter foo_bar_mumble is a postfix parameter, run # postconf foo_bar_mumble if it's not a postfix parameter, you get: postconf: warning: foo_bar_mumble: unknown parameter > This system was originally set > up by someone else, so they must have set this, and I just never noticed > it, since I have not actually implemented quotas yet - although I've > been toying with the idea, which is why I had not commented out those > lines in main.cf... > better remove them. > I've been planning on switching this installation over to dovecot soon > anyway for POP/IMAP access, so will just use the dovecot LDA and quota > plug-in if/when I decide to implement quotas... > >> There is as-yet no support for "+=" in main.cf parameter settings. > > Ok, thanks for the confirmation... >
