date:20070629


On 6/28/2007, Andy Fadich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
The message does have the X-IMAP Header intact.(X-IMAP: 1183060687 
02) The email is hidden when using a pop3 client(doesn't 
download it), or telnetting an account and using the LIST command.

The problem I am having is that within webmail (read mail module of
usermin) it doesn't hide the message. I think Dovecot is doing
everything correctly, but more so usermin is not registering that the
message should be hidden, and I don't know how to fix it.


File a bug against usermin?

--

Best regards,

Charles

Re: [Dovecot] FreeBSD NFS file locking mechanism

2007-06-29 Thread Geoffroy Desvernay

Timo Sirainen a écrit :
> On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 15:18 +0200, Geoffroy Desvernay wrote:
>> Tony Tsang a écrit :
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I have some machines running FreeBSD and dovecot deployed. User's home
>>> dir is on NFS mount and I've found that dovecot only works with
>>> dotlock file locking mechanism, fcntl and flock failed. Now it causes
>>> problem with thunderbird (thunderbird is cachine connections) waiting
>>> forever and I noticed that dovecot is trying to acquire a lock but
>>> unsuccessful since the lock file is in place. Is it possible to use
>>> file locking other than dotlock on FreeBSD NFS mounted homedir? How do
>>> I achieve this?
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot.
>>>
>>> Tony Tsang.
>> We have the same setup, working with
>> lock_method: flock
> 
> lock_method affects only index files. Are they also in NFS?
> 
Oups... Sorry, next time I'll read a bit more before answer...

>> We have rpc.lockd running (rpc_lockd_enable="YES" in rc.conf) in both
>> nfs servers and clients(dovecot server).
> 
> flock locks files only locally, they aren't visible to other computers.
> Only fcntl locks are. (Except with Linux 2.6.5+, AFAIK no other OSes do
> this).
> 
so I'll double-check my config...
-- 
 ___
/ Geoffroy DESVERNAY   |\
   /\`Service info`| Tel: (+33|0)4 91 05 45 24  /\
   \/ Ecole Centrale de Marseille  | Fax: (+33|0)4 91 05 45 98  \/
\ (ex-EGIM)| Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] /
 ---




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[Dovecot] Debian packages

2007-06-29 Thread Moritz Mertinkat

Hi there,

anyone interested in Debian Dovecot 1.0.1 packages?
I have created a package for etch/stable...
Could do that for sarge/oldstable as well.

Greets,
Maurice.

[Dovecot] Copyright notices in code

I thought about committing this change to all .c files:

Removed all Copyright Timo Sirainen comments. They weren't always
correct and the year numbers were rarely updated when something was
changed. Copyright is owned by the creator by default in practically all
countries, there's no need to advertise it everywhere. 

Can anyone think of reasons why this wouldn't be a good idea?



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] dovecot help

2007-06-29 Thread Andy Fadich

Here is the fix to my problem.

"You need to set the ' Mail storage format for Inbox' to 'Remote POP3
server' or 'Remote IMAP server'."  

I had it reading the file directly ("sendmail style single file mbox")  Once
I changed that setting it stopped showing the email.

Thanks for the help guys!

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Marcus
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 4:13 AM
To: 'Dovecot Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [Dovecot] dovecot help


On 6/28/2007, Andy Fadich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The message does have the X-IMAP Header intact.(X-IMAP: 1183060687
> 02) The email is hidden when using a pop3 client(doesn't 
> download it), or telnetting an account and using the LIST command.
> The problem I am having is that within webmail (read mail module of
> usermin) it doesn't hide the message. I think Dovecot is doing
> everything correctly, but more so usermin is not registering that the
> message should be hidden, and I don't know how to fix it.

File a bug against usermin?

-- 

Best regards,

Charles

Re: [Dovecot] Copyright notices in code

2007-06-29 Thread Trever L. Adams


Timo Sirainen wrote:

I thought about committing this change to all .c files:

Removed all Copyright Timo Sirainen comments. They weren't always
correct and the year numbers were rarely updated when something was
changed. Copyright is owned by the creator by default in practically all
countries, there's no need to advertise it everywhere. 


Can anyone think of reasons why this wouldn't be a good idea?

  


It is always a good idea to spell out the copyright anyway. Besides, you 
can't gaurantee that no one will use one file somewhere else, before 
long the question of ownership and license becomes an issue if these 
aren't spelled out in each file.


Just my over careful 2 cents.

Trever

Re: [Dovecot] Copyright notices in code

2007-06-29 Thread Flannery, Andrew

I think the authors' names are sufficient. 

Andrew Flannery

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Timo Sirainen
Sent: 29 June 2007 10:15
To: dovecot@dovecot.org
Subject: [Dovecot] Copyright notices in code

I thought about committing this change to all .c files:

Removed all Copyright Timo Sirainen comments. They weren't always
correct and the year numbers were rarely updated when something was
changed. Copyright is owned by the creator by default in practically all
countries, there's no need to advertise it everywhere. 

Can anyone think of reasons why this wouldn't be a good idea?

Re: [Dovecot] Copyright notices in code

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 17:30 +0200, DINH Viêt Hoà wrote:
> On 6/29/07, Trever L. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > > I thought about committing this change to all .c files:
> > >
> > > Removed all Copyright Timo Sirainen comments. They weren't always
> > > correct and the year numbers were rarely updated when something was
> > > changed. Copyright is owned by the creator by default in practically all
> > > countries, there's no need to advertise it everywhere.
> > >
> > > Can anyone think of reasons why this wouldn't be a good idea?
> >
> > It is always a good idea to spell out the copyright anyway. Besides, you
> > can't gaurantee that no one will use one file somewhere else, before
> > long the question of ownership and license becomes an issue if these
> > aren't spelled out in each file.
> 
> anyway, if someone use the file somewhere else, the copyright can be edited :)
> Personally, I think that a up-to-date file named 'COPYRIGHT' or
> something like that should be sufficient. (though, I care only about
> nice code and good architecture and don't care about boring licence
> stuff...).

One possibility would be:

/* Copyright Dovecot authors, see included AUTHORS and COPYING files */

But it's still a bit annoying to copy&paste that to all new created
files. :)



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] Copyright notices in code

2007-06-29 Thread DINH Viêt Hoà

On 6/29/07, Trever L. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Timo Sirainen wrote:
> I thought about committing this change to all .c files:
>
> Removed all Copyright Timo Sirainen comments. They weren't always
> correct and the year numbers were rarely updated when something was
> changed. Copyright is owned by the creator by default in practically all
> countries, there's no need to advertise it everywhere.
>
> Can anyone think of reasons why this wouldn't be a good idea?

It is always a good idea to spell out the copyright anyway. Besides, you
can't gaurantee that no one will use one file somewhere else, before
long the question of ownership and license becomes an issue if these
aren't spelled out in each file.

anyway, if someone use the file somewhere else, the copyright can be edited :)
Personally, I think that a up-to-date file named 'COPYRIGHT' or
something like that should be sufficient. (though, I care only about
nice code and good architecture and don't care about boring licence
stuff...).

--
DINH Viêt Hoà

Re: [Dovecot] Copyright notices in code

2007-06-29 Thread Peter Hessler

On 2007 Jun 29 (Fri) at 17:30:34 +0200 (+0200), DINH Vi?t Ho? wrote:
> anyway, if someone use the file somewhere else, the copyright can be 
> edited
> :)
> Personally, I think that a up-to-date file named 'COPYRIGHT' or
> something like that should be sufficient. (though, I care only about
> nice code and good architecture and don't care about boring licence
> stuff...).

License stuff may be boring, but its important.  Just ask the GPL3 
people.  Or Tivo.  Or Microsoft.  Or SCO.  (the list goes on and on)

The OpenBSD project (which I don't talk for) has a policy of every file 
has copyright (and license) explicitly in the top of the file.  This way 
it isn't ambigious.

I can understand this being boring, but accurate copyright and 
licensing can and will protect your code.  Even if you want to make it 
as free as possible, you still need to declare it.

-- 
A diplomat is a man who can convince his wife she'd look stout in a fur
coat.

[Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Don Russell


I'm using Dovecot 1.0.1-12 on Linux/Fedora 7
along with sendmail and procmail all running on the same box
mail is stored in mbox format

It's a small system with a half dozen or so e-mail "accounts". Each with 
40-60MB of messages in various folders.


I keep seeing messages about how mbox is antiquated and anybody with 
more than 100 messages etc should not use mbox, but use maildir instead.


I'm not entirely convinced there seem to be pros and cons for each. 
Is there a discussion somewhere that really highlights why one format is 
so much better than the other?


The last time I tried to convert from mbox to maildir, things got pretty 
botched up, no data loss, but it wasn't pretty. :-)


Can Dovecot handle mbox for some users and maildir for others? I'd like 
to try a conversion for one user... I'll probably create a new user, 
then have procmail copy (via ! action code) all mail for one user to 
that new user.


Thank you

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Jesse C. Smillie

Wow this is weird because I'm about to make this same jump next week!

From what I'm reading so far the big draw back with mbox is the single
file with all the emails in it. When you delete a message from that
file the whole file has to be rewritten without that email in it. If
the box is big enough that can be a serious drag on the server. We have
been using Dovecot here all school year for Imap & Pop3 with the Mbox
format and when two or more people delete at the same time the
utilization on my 3ware card shoots up. We bought the BBU unit for the
3ware so I could enable WRITE cache and that has helped tremendously.

I thought this study in regards to speed was quite interesting:
http://www.courier-mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir/

So far my testing conversion process has gone really well. I am
surprised how easy it was to tell procmail to do MailDir instead and
even the conversion process was super easy. For converting the old
inbox and folders I am using the tool mb2md.pl from
http://batleth.sapienti-sat.org/projects/mb2md/

I was having a really hard time figuring all of this out until I ran
into this webpage:

http://adam.rosi-kessel.org/weblog/2007/04/18/adams-super-simple-guide-to-mbox-maildir-conversion/

I know through namespaces you can do inbox in one type and other boxes
in another type. I was initially thinking about doing all new stuff in
maildir and still support the old ~/mail format. The setup seemed easy
enough, but I figured in the long run I am shutting down the server for
a few hours to do this so I mis well go all the way.

The only thing I'm not sure of is what the best file system to keep this
on. I have been keeping my home directories on ReiserFS for quite a
while, but one of our tech thinks XFS would be good. All data I have
right now tells me to stay ReiserFS though. Even Dovecot's own page
says XFS may not be a wise choice.

Hope some of this stuff helps you. My server BTW is:
Slackware Slamd64 11 (Added Kerberos, Dovecot, etc after the fact)
Dual AMD Opteron 242s
4 Gigs RAM
800 Gig RAID 5 3G SATA array
ReiserFS on /home /var/spool/mail

-Jesse C. Smillie

"Insert inspirational or witty comment here"

Don Russell wrote:

I'm using Dovecot 1.0.1-12 on Linux/Fedora 7
along with sendmail and procmail all running on the same box
mail is stored in mbox format

It's a small system with a half dozen or so e-mail "accounts". Each
with 40-60MB of messages in various folders.

I keep seeing messages about how mbox is antiquated and anybody with
more than 100 messages etc should not use mbox, but use maildir instead.

I'm not entirely convinced there seem to be pros and cons for
each. Is there a discussion somewhere that really highlights why one
format is so much better than the other?

The last time I tried to convert from mbox to maildir, things got
pretty botched up, no data loss, but it wasn't pretty. :-)

Can Dovecot handle mbox for some users and maildir for others? I'd
like to try a conversion for one user... I'll probably create a new
user, then have procmail copy (via ! action code) all mail for one
user to that new user.

Thank you

-
This mail was scanned by BitDefender
For more informations please visit http://www.bitdefender.com

-
begin:vcard
fn:Jesse C. Smillie
n:Smillie;Jesse C.
org:Gateway School District;Technology Department
adr:;;;Monroeville;PA;15146;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Mac Tech / Linux Administrator / Mac Administrator
tel;work:412-858-0453
tel;cell:412-861-3423
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: [Dovecot] Monitoring Recomendations

2007-06-29 Thread Dehnert James Sr



On Jun 29, 2007, at 2:00 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:


-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Dehnert James Sr schrieb:
I have a client that I have installed Dovecot 1.0.1 for is having  
some

performance issues.  Especially when using IMAP from various Outlook
clients.  I have TLS installed and all the IMAP connections are  
secured.


I'm wondering is anyone has any recommendations for monitoring  
dovecot
performance.  I'd like to try and nail down where the real  
performance
issues are.  I suspect outlook, but I want to eliminate Dovecot as  
the
cause of any problems, or, if I have a problem with Dovecot, I  
want to

identify any issues I can and fix them.



Thanks,
Zeke

--
James "Zeke" Dehnert
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +1 707.546.6620 x602 Fax: +1 707.324.8043
"Life is racing, everything else is just waiting"


Hi,
outlook isnt outlook , first clear what versions they use each
version of outlook is different ( including their service pack  
levels )

so i.e. outlook 2007 makes imap stuff very different to the versions
before, after all outlook wasnt a very good imap client since ever.
Be sure that you have recommanded Outlook entries in dovecot.conf  
( see

wiki )


The client has basically every combination of Outlook and Outlook  
Express imaginable.



and if you need help you should show your dovecot.conf here.


Dovecot.conf

protocols= imap imaps pop3 pop3s
protocol imap {
 listen = 127.0.0.1
 ssl_listen = *
}
protocol pop3 {
 listen = 127.0.0.1
 ssl_listen = *
}
disable_plaintext_auth = yes
log_path = /var/log/dovecot/dovecot.log
info_log_path = /var/log/dovecot/dovecot.log
log_timestamp = "%b %d %H:%M:%S "
ssl_disable = no
ssl_cert_file = /etc/postfix/certs/mail_public_cert.pem
ssl_key_file = /etc/postfix/certs/mail_private_key.pem
ssl_ca_file = /etc/postfix/certs/cacert.pem
ssl_cipher_list = ALL:!LOW
verbose_ssl = no
login_greeting = Dovecot ready.
mail_location = maildir:/var/spool/mail/%u/
mail_debug = no
lock_method = fcntl
verbose_proctitle = yes
first_valid_uid = 500
mbox_read_locks = fcntl
protocol imap {
  imap_client_workarounds = outlook-idle delay-newmail
}
protocol pop3 {
  pop3_uidl_format = %08Xu%08Xv
  pop3_client_workarounds = outlook-no-nuls
}
protocol lda {
  postmaster_address = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
}
auth_verbose = no
auth_debug = no
auth_debug_passwords = no
auth default {
  mechanisms = plain login
  passdb pam {
  }
  userdb passwd {
  }
  user = root
  socket listen {
client {
  path = /var/spool/postfix/private/auth
  mode = 0660
  user = postfix
  group = postfix
}
  }
}

and describe what perfomance stuff you mean, have you tested it by  
your

own ( dont trust users ! )?


The performance issues are a) slow response on the lan, and b)  
unusable low response from remote users.  This is always with IMAP,  
of we switch the users to POP3 things are acceptably fast.  With POP3  
things are just plain snappy performance wise.  With IMAP there are  
noticeable waits for messages to appear.  The field users are of  
particular concern.  They can see message headers, but they never get  
the message bodies downloaded.  I have checked their configurations,  
and with the same systems connected locally that can get to all of  
their mail.  I realize there are a number of factors that could  
affect a remote user that are out of my control, but I can connect  
remotely with my Mac (mail.app) and the performance seems fine to me.



For a first look you should have a i.e dovecot.log etc to see failures


I have been prowling the logs for weeks, there are no errors that I  
can correlate to IMAP performance (no errors at all really, just the  
standard connect-disconnect messages), which is why I'm looking for  
recommendations for performance monitoring.  I have ratcheted up the  
debugging on the log files, but all I see is more info on normal  
behavior.


I believe that Dovecot is running just fine, but I need some metrics  
to prove that to the users.


I think i remember reading problems with outlook 2007 and tls, but  
i can

remember exactly

I have no reports from users having problems with outlook and dovecot
1.0.1 at my systems ( but i dont think i have much of them, so i cant
say that problems are are unthinkable *g )  )

- --
Mit freundlichen Gruessen
Best Regards

Robert Schetterer

https://www.schetterer.org
Germany
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGhMpCfGH2AvR16oERAkFhAJ9Mf/jFafleRx4hsr5o2803kBt8OACePYjR
VCcArGHgWivAL1QC3jKf8pA=
=npgq
-END PGP SIGNATURE-





Thanks,
Zeke

--
James "Zeke" Dehnert
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: +1 707.546.6620 x602 Fax: +1 707.324.8043
"Life is racing, everything else is just waiting"

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 13:56 -0400, Jesse C. Smillie wrote:
> I thought this study in regards to speed was quite interesting:
>  http://www.courier-mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir/ 
> 

It probably doesn't have much relevance to Dovecot+mbox though. Maildir
is faster with expunges and with concurrent mailbox access, but I think
Dovecot+mbox (without external changes) is faster for pretty much
everything else.

Anyway I think the main reason to use maildir is that it's much more
difficult to corrupt mailboxes.

The upcoming dbox and cydir formats of course beat everything in
performance :)

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] Monitoring Recomendations

2007-06-29 Thread Troy Engel


Dehnert James Sr wrote:


The performance issues are a) slow response on the lan, and b) unusable 
low response from remote users.  This is always with IMAP, of we switch 


As a possible aide, have your user(s) run TCPView 
(http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Networking/TcpView.mspx) 
in a corner of their screen before starting Outlook, then when Outlook 
is launched to watch the view for "red bars" (which indicate a client 
attempt to do something and getting blocked/denied).


I had a problem with setting up Outlook + Exchange + self-signed SSL + 
Remote awhile back; using TCPView helped show me that even though I was 
telling Outlook to use SSL/HTTP for the connection, the initial Outlook 
setup was still trying to use NetBIOS calls for the server, which showed 
up in TCPView very clearly.


Perhaps the util will help you identify something Outlook is doing that 
it's not supposed to, as was my case.


hth,
-te

--
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid Inc. | http://www.fluid.com

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> The upcoming dbox and cydir formats of course beat everything in
> performance :)

cydir ? Does this mean there is a cyrus-like storage coming soon ?

-- 
Nicolas

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread John Gateley

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:14:42 -0700
Don Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Can Dovecot handle mbox for some users and maildir for others?

Yes, if you don't have the mail_location variable set,
then Dovecot will look in
~/Maildir
/var/mail/username
~/mail
~/Mail
in that order.

See http://wiki.dovecot.org/MailLocation

j

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 20:26 +0200, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
> Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > The upcoming dbox and cydir formats of course beat everything in
> > performance :)
> 
> cydir ? Does this mean there is a cyrus-like storage coming soon ?

Already in v1.1 tree. It's what I'm using for my index file stress
tests, because the format is practically just the index files and
"." named files.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt

* Rick Romero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> > My experience tells me to stay away from ReiserFS as well.
> 
> How about NSS?   I was considering using Netware's NSS for my backend
> server - either from Netware or Linux OES, but I'm not sure how OES
> actually handles the filesystem.. Anyways, in addition to journaling,
> you get deleted file salvage, open file backup/snapshot, and easily
> expandable volumes...

Sounds like a job for ZFS :)

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Postfix - Einrichtung, Betrieb und Wartung   Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155
http://www.arschkrebs.de
Ballmer should step down in favour of Mr T, because he pity the fool
who don't got high-end video cards and 4GB RAM for Vista Aero!

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Rick Romero

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 20:53 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Rick Romero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > > My experience tells me to stay away from ReiserFS as well.
> > 
> > How about NSS?   I was considering using Netware's NSS for my backend
> > server - either from Netware or Linux OES, but I'm not sure how OES
> > actually handles the filesystem.. Anyways, in addition to journaling,
> > you get deleted file salvage, open file backup/snapshot, and easily
> > expandable volumes...
> 
> Sounds like a job for ZFS :)

Yeah, but ZFS seems too new compared to 10 year old NSS ;)

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt

* Jesse C. Smillie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> The only thing I'm not sure of is what the best file system to keep this 
> on.  I have been keeping my home directories on ReiserFS for quite a 
> while, but one of our tech thinks XFS would be good.

XFS is lousy for many small files. We tried XFS for our 9000 Users
(Maildir) and swithced back to ext3.

> All data I have right now tells me to stay ReiserFS though.  Even
> Dovecot's own page says XFS may not be a wise choice.

My experience tells me to stay away from ReiserFS as well.

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Postfix - Einrichtung, Betrieb und Wartung   Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155
http://www.arschkrebs.de
Unix is the answer, but only if you phrase the question very carefully.

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Jeff Kowalczyk

FWIW, I used imapsync for the data migrations of a) an old sendmail server
with mbox format to a new server running postfix+dovecot, and b) and old
and busted Microsoft SBS2000 Exchange instance to a new server running
postfix+dovecot.

Worked well in both cases, and the process left the original
servers intact in case the migration hadn't gone as well.

Completely unscientific observation, but the Maildir format seems quite
responsive in the common email pattern of open the inbox, fetch the
message headers, let the filter process spam, finally read ham messages.
That has a lot to do with Dovecot's speed, of course.

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Rick Romero

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 20:34 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Jesse C. Smillie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > The only thing I'm not sure of is what the best file system to keep this 
> > on.  I have been keeping my home directories on ReiserFS for quite a 
> > while, but one of our tech thinks XFS would be good.
> 
> XFS is lousy for many small files. We tried XFS for our 9000 Users
> (Maildir) and swithced back to ext3.
> 
> > All data I have right now tells me to stay ReiserFS though.  Even
> > Dovecot's own page says XFS may not be a wise choice.
> 
> My experience tells me to stay away from ReiserFS as well.

How about NSS?   I was considering using Netware's NSS for my backend
server - either from Netware or Linux OES, but I'm not sure how OES
actually handles the filesystem.. Anyways, in addition to journaling,
you get deleted file salvage, open file backup/snapshot, and easily
expandable volumes...I know you can do the last with LVM on Linux,
and I recall something similar on FreeBSD - but I have no experience
with either, and they're both missing salvage and snapshot.

Ok ok, so I really just love salvage.  ;)

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Mark Nienberg


Don Russell wrote:

I'm using Dovecot 1.0.1-12 on Linux/Fedora 7
along with sendmail and procmail all running on the same box
mail is stored in mbox format

It's a small system with a half dozen or so e-mail "accounts". Each with 
40-60MB of messages in various folders.


I keep seeing messages about how mbox is antiquated and anybody with 
more than 100 messages etc should not use mbox, but use maildir instead.


I'm not entirely convinced there seem to be pros and cons for each. 
Is there a discussion somewhere that really highlights why one format is 
so much better than the other?


One factor not often discussed: When I switched from mbox to maildir the size of 
incremental backups went down to a fraction of its previous size (only the new 
messages are backed up, not the entire mailbox).  It allowed me to do incremental 
backups to disk instead of tape, which I still use for full backups.


P.S.  consider maildrop instead of procmail if you switch to maildir.  See info in 
the dovecot wiki.


Mark

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Ben Winslow

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 13:56 -0400, Jesse C. Smillie wrote:
> Wow this is weird because I'm about to make this same jump next week!
> 
>  From what I'm reading so far the big draw back with mbox is the single 
> file with all the emails in it.  When you delete a message from that 
> file the whole file has to be rewritten without that email in it.  If 
> the box is big enough that can be a serious drag on the server.  We have 
> been using Dovecot here all school year for Imap & Pop3 with the Mbox 
> format and when two or more people delete at the same time the 
> utilization on my 3ware card shoots up.  We bought the BBU unit for the 
> 3ware so I could enable WRITE cache and that has helped tremendously. 
> 
> I thought this study in regards to speed was quite interesting:
>  http://www.courier-mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir/ 
> 
> 
> So far my testing conversion process has gone really well.  I am 
> surprised how easy it was to tell procmail to do MailDir instead and 
> even the conversion process was super easy.  For converting the old 
> inbox and folders I am using the tool  mb2md.pl from 
> http://batleth.sapienti-sat.org/projects/mb2md/
> 
> I was having a really hard time figuring all of this out until I ran 
> into this webpage:
> http://adam.rosi-kessel.org/weblog/2007/04/18/adams-super-simple-guide-to-mbox-maildir-conversion/
> 
> I know through namespaces you can do inbox in one type and other boxes 
> in another type.  I was initially thinking about doing all new stuff in 
> maildir and still support the old ~/mail format.  The setup seemed easy 
> enough, but I figured in the long run I am shutting down the server for 
> a few hours to do this so I mis well go all the way. 
> 
> The only thing I'm not sure of is what the best file system to keep this 
> on.  I have been keeping my home directories on ReiserFS for quite a 
> while, but one of our tech thinks XFS would be good.  All data I have 
> right now tells me to stay ReiserFS though.  Even Dovecot's own page 
> says XFS may not be a wise choice.

We've had good experiences with XFS, hosting ~40k mailboxes totalling
~400 GiB across 2 NFS fileservers (although we're not using dovecot for
those users, yet) on hardware that's not particularly beefy by today's
standards (and well below the specs you provided for your server.)

I've also personally had terrible experiences on a couple of other
systems with reiserfs -- especially when the FS became slightly corrupt
(due to failing hardware or the power going out at *just* the right
time), though performance wasn't that great either.

All the systems I mention were/are using Maildir, and this is somewhat
contrary to many benchmarks, but it's been working well for me.  YMMV
and all that rot.

-- 
Ben Winslow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Dovecot] Mailbox location suggestion (was Re: mbox vs maildir)

2007-06-29 Thread John Gateley

A suggestion: along with mail_location, create a mail_directories
variable that contains the search order, so that it can be specified.
It would default to something like
mail_directories = maildir:~/Maildir|mbox:~/mail:INBOX=/var/mail/%u|...

I could use this. On one system I manage, I've converted a couple
of us to Maildirs, but the rest of the users are still on mbox
in a non-standard place: mbox:~/Mail:INBOX=~/mbox
I don't want to do anything special, because eventually all
the users will be switched to Maildirs, but in the meantime
it would be nice to be able to use Dovecot for all of them
without doing a "ln -s ~user/mbox ~user/Mail/inbox" for each
of them.

j

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 13:39:11 -0500
John Gateley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:14:42 -0700
> Don Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Can Dovecot handle mbox for some users and maildir for others?
> 
> Yes, if you don't have the mail_location variable set,
> then Dovecot will look in
> ~/Maildir
> /var/mail/username
> ~/mail
> ~/Mail
> in that order.
> 
> See http://wiki.dovecot.org/MailLocation
> 
> j

Re: [Dovecot] Mailbox location suggestion (was Re: mbox vs maildir)

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 14:41 -0500, John Gateley wrote:
> A suggestion: along with mail_location, create a mail_directories
> variable that contains the search order, so that it can be specified.
> It would default to something like
> mail_directories = maildir:~/Maildir|mbox:~/mail:INBOX=/var/mail/%u|...

How about a post-login script like http://wiki.dovecot.org/MailLocation
explains?



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 20:26 +0200, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
>> Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 
>> > The upcoming dbox and cydir formats of course beat everything in
>> > performance :)
>> 
>> cydir ? Does this mean there is a cyrus-like storage coming soon ?
>
> Already in v1.1 tree. It's what I'm using for my index file stress
> tests, because the format is practically just the index files and
> "." named files.

I just read http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2007-May/022772.html,
and the results look really impressive. 10 times faster than
Maildir... 

Time to upgrade and test ! :-)

Thanks Timo,
-- 
Nicolas

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 21:49 +0200, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
> Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 20:26 +0200, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
> >> Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> 
> >> > The upcoming dbox and cydir formats of course beat everything in
> >> > performance :)
> >> 
> >> cydir ? Does this mean there is a cyrus-like storage coming soon ?
> >
> > Already in v1.1 tree. It's what I'm using for my index file stress
> > tests, because the format is practically just the index files and
> > "." named files.
> 
> I just read http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2007-May/022772.html,
> and the results look really impressive. 10 times faster than
> Maildir... 
> 
> Time to upgrade and test ! :-)

Just remember that if you lose the index files there's no easy way to
recover the mailbox. Well, except by copying the files to maildir..

I'm not sure if I should try to make cydir anything else than a
benchmark format or a simple example for writing mail storage backends.
I'm hoping that dbox will be practically as fast in all situations.




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 21:49 +0200, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
>> Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 
>> > On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 20:26 +0200, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
>> >> Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > The upcoming dbox and cydir formats of course beat everything in
>> >> > performance :)
>> >> 
>> >> cydir ? Does this mean there is a cyrus-like storage coming soon ?
>> >
>> > Already in v1.1 tree. It's what I'm using for my index file stress
>> > tests, because the format is practically just the index files and
>> > "." named files.
>> 
>> I just read http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2007-May/022772.html,
>> and the results look really impressive. 10 times faster than
>> Maildir... 
>> 
>> Time to upgrade and test ! :-)
>
> Just remember that if you lose the index files there's no easy way to
> recover the mailbox. Well, except by copying the files to maildir..

Good to know, Thanks. 

> I'm not sure if I should try to make cydir anything else than a
> benchmark format or a simple example for writing mail storage backends.
> I'm hoping that dbox will be practically as fast in all situations.

If performance of dbox is as fast as cydir, and if cydir is not easily
recoverable (a cyrus reconstruct-like tool would help a lot here),
well, cydir could stay as benchmark format. But...

As I noticed almost no difference in performance (no real numbers
here, just a usage feeling with 5-10k messages mailboxes) between
dovecot 1.0 + maildir and cyrus 2.2.13/2.3.8, having dovecot use a
storage format 10 times faster than Maildir is really attractive.

-- 
Nicolas

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 22:16 +0200, Nicolas KOWALSKI wrote:
> As I noticed almost no difference in performance (no real numbers
> here, just a usage feeling with 5-10k messages mailboxes) between
> dovecot 1.0 + maildir and cyrus 2.2.13/2.3.8, having dovecot use a
> storage format 10 times faster than Maildir is really attractive.

The 10 times was only when appending new messages. I haven't benchmarked
other operations. I doubt there is any noticeable performance gain for
single users, unless your mailbox has hundreds of thousands of messages.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir


All data I have right now tells me to stay ReiserFS though.  Even
Dovecot's own page says XFS may not be a wise choice.



My experience tells me to stay away from ReiserFS as well.


Please, lets not start that war up again! ;)

Reiser has worked fine for me for many years, but I think the next time 
I rebuild my servers I'll be using ext3, in anticipation of ext4 (since 
it should be a fairly seamless switch)...


--

Best regards,

Charles

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir


On 6/29/2007, Rick Romero ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

I know you can do the last with LVM on Linux, and I recall something
similar on FreeBSD - but I have no experience with either, and
they're both missing salvage and snapshot.


Eh? Guess I've just been dreaming then every time I do a snapshot on one 
of my LVM volumes..


;)

--

Best regards,

Charles

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir


Just remember that if you lose the index files there's no easy way to
recover the mailbox. Well, except by copying the files to maildir..

I'm not sure if I should try to make cydir anything else than a
benchmark format or a simple example for writing mail storage backends.
I'm hoping that dbox will be practically as fast in all situations.


One advantage of cydir over dbox was mentioned by Mark above re 
incremental backups - with dbox, you'd still have to backup the entire 
mailbox file, while with cydir, you'd only have to copy newer messages.


I think making cydir a real, viable replacement for standard maildir 
would be a good thing...


:)

--

Best regards,

Charles

[Dovecot] wiki.dovecot.org double-escapes capcha info

2007-06-29 Thread Ben Winslow

The "capcha" on wiki.dovecot.org seems to be double-escaping HTML
entities in the informational message, such that the wiki displays
"Captcha to prevent wiki spam, write Dovecot
here:" [sic.]  When I dutifully entered "Dovecot," it
didn't work, saying "You didn't provide the correct
captcha. Use the browser's Back button and try again, or register an
account to avoid this." [sic]

It took a few minutes for me to realize what was going on and simply
enter "Dovecot" for the capcha...

-- 
Ben Winslow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

On 6/29/07, Charles Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Just remember that if you lose the index files there's no easy way to
> recover the mailbox. Well, except by copying the files to maildir..
>
> I'm not sure if I should try to make cydir anything else than a
> benchmark format or a simple example for writing mail storage backends.
> I'm hoping that dbox will be practically as fast in all situations.

One advantage of cydir over dbox was mentioned by Mark above re
incremental backups - with dbox, you'd still have to backup the entire
mailbox file, while with cydir, you'd only have to copy newer messages.

True.  In my old job, this was the main reason I switched users
mailboxes from UW-imap MBX to Cyrus. Performance was also much better
after the switch.

--
Nicolas

[Dovecot] Document variable modifiers in pop3_uidl_format

2007-06-29 Thread Ben Winslow

Attached is a trivial patch to document the fact one can use variable
modifiers in pop3_uidl_format.

-- 
Ben Winslow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
# HG changeset patch
# User Ben Winslow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
# Date 1183149610 14400
# Node ID f3022d5d6b3fe673b9682190e1dea2f6c29e51ca
# Parent  ebbc85ebf805c63fff6430007395fbc5132e3d65
Better document the fact that pop3_uidl_format supports modifiers.

diff -r ebbc85ebf805 -r f3022d5d6b3f dovecot-example.conf
--- a/dovecot-example.conf	Thu Jun 28 17:18:34 2007 +0300
+++ b/dovecot-example.conf	Fri Jun 29 16:40:10 2007 -0400
@@ -586,7 +586,8 @@ protocol pop3 {
   #pop3_lock_session = no
 
   # POP3 UIDL (unique mail identifier) format to use. You can use following
-  # variables:
+  # variables, along with the variable modifiers described in
+  # doc/wiki/Variables.txt (e.g. %Uf for the filename in uppercase)
   #
   #  %v - Mailbox's IMAP UIDVALIDITY
   #  %u - Mail's IMAP UID


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir

2007-06-29 Thread Rick Romero

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 16:32 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 6/29/2007, Rick Romero ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I know you can do the last with LVM on Linux, and I recall something
> > similar on FreeBSD - but I have no experience with either, and
> > they're both missing salvage and snapshot.
> 
> Eh? Guess I've just been dreaming then every time I do a snapshot on one 
> of my LVM volumes..

I see that now, Wikipedia has a decent comparison page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_systems

Snapshot is a start, but still no salvage that I can find  :(

OTOH, Being 10 years old means NSS is 'only' limited to 8TB

[Dovecot] connection dropped by imap

2007-06-29 Thread Mantas

hello,

when i create imap account in mail client (ex: outlook, thunderbird) it's
allright. but if i want login with this account to webmail (i have 2
webmail: squirrelmail and roundcube) commonly i get error. squirrelmail
say: Connection droped by imap. roundcube say nothing(white screen). But
sometimes i can login. 
and i see one thing...
when i restart apache, i can login above 1-2 hours, but later i can't
login.
i restart apache again and again i can login 1-2 hours.

please help

Re: [Dovecot] connection dropped by imap

2007-06-29 Thread Mantas


dovecot 1.0.1
freebsd 5.3
apache 1.3.34
php 4.4.5


On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 00:18:38 +0300, Mantas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hello,
> 
> when i create imap account in mail client (ex: outlook, thunderbird) it's
> allright. but if i want login with this account to webmail (i have 2
> webmail: squirrelmail and roundcube) commonly i get error. squirrelmail
> say: Connection droped by imap. roundcube say nothing(white screen). But
> sometimes i can login.
> and i see one thing...
> when i restart apache, i can login above 1-2 hours, but later i can't
> login.
> i restart apache again and again i can login 1-2 hours.
> 
> please help

Re: [Dovecot] mbox vs maildir