On Jan 22, 2010, at 9:22 PM, Frank Cusack wrote:
but I wonder if anyone here is running lots of Maildirs on zfs?
When you say "lots of Maildirs" I assume you mean filesystem-per-user?
You can of course use "lots of Maildirs" yet have only a single zfs
filesystem but that doesn't seem to me to b
On January 22, 2010 9:03:42 PM -0500 Charles Sprickman
wrote:
Sorry for the tangent,
You should probably start a new thread when changing the subject. Then
you don't have to be sorry. :)
but I wonder if anyone here is running lots of Maildirs on zfs?
When you say "lots of Maildirs" I assu
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Frank Cusack wrote:
On January 22, 2010 11:05:22 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
Dunno about zfs, but I've heard that at least in one NetApp installation
deduplication was way too heavyweight.
zfs dedup is pretty resources intensive -- for writes. For mail I
suspect reads
Then I guess I will need to let Postfix do the delivery so it can be aware
of what users exist and not, to be sure it will do all rejections when the
SMTP MX connection is still up to let it reject back over that connection.
So Dovecot would just be the IMAP daemon, and some webmail program used on
On 23.1.2010, at 2.40, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>> My user_attrs is
>> user_attrs =
>> homeDirectory=home,uidNumber=uid,gidNumber=gid,mailMessageStore=mail,mai
>> lQuota=quota=maildir:storage
>
> You can change this to be:
>
> user_attrs = .., mailMessageStore=home, ..
>
> and in dovecot.conf:
>
On 23.1.2010, at 2.36, Sebastian Logar wrote:
> What version would you suggest, probably latest? I installed this one
> from ubuntu repository.
Latest, yeah. But..:
> My user_attrs is
> user_attrs =
> homeDirectory=home,uidNumber=uid,gidNumber=gid,mailMessageStore=mail,mai
> lQuota=quota=maildir
Hi Timo,
First of all thank you for responding so fast. So i need to change
maildir ldap entry to maildir:/nas/5b/7d/5f/erikp/Maildir/ or i just can
change user_attrs?
What version would you suggest, probably latest? I installed this one
from ubuntu repository.
My user_attrs is
user_attrs =
home
On 23.1.2010, at 1.45, Sebastian Logar wrote:
> I am using Dovecot 1.0.10 with LDA/postfix option reading user data from
> ldap, but the problem would be nonexistent maildir. Connection with ldap
> should be fine since reading proper maildir folder. Is it possible to
> auto creating maildir folder
Hi!
I am using Dovecot 1.0.10 with LDA/postfix option reading user data from
ldap, but the problem would be nonexistent maildir. Connection with ldap
should be fine since reading proper maildir folder. Is it possible to
auto creating maildir folders even on received mail since the you can
auto
David,
On 1/22/10 12:34 PM, "David Halik" wrote:
>
> We currently have IP session 'sticky' on our L4's and it didn't help all
> that much. yes, it reduces thrashing on the backend, but ultimately it
> won't help the corruption. Like you said, multiple logins will still go
> to different servers
On January 22, 2010 11:44:07 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 22.1.2010, at 23.39, Frank Cusack wrote:
On January 22, 2010 11:21:09 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
Or will there be a global index?
Yes. That's what dbox SIS is about. You have a global repository of
(large) MIME parts, indexed
>
> You guys must serve a pretty heavy load. What's your peak connection count
> across all those machines? How's the load? We recently went through a
> hardware replacement cycle, and were targeting < 25% utilization at peak
> load so we can lose one of our sites (half of our machines are in each
On 22.1.2010, at 23.39, Frank Cusack wrote:
> On January 22, 2010 11:21:09 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>> Or will there be a global index?
>>
>> Yes. That's what dbox SIS is about. You have a global repository of
>> (large) MIME parts, indexed by their SHA1 sum (or something).
>
> In the cas
Cor,
On 1/22/10 1:05 PM, "Cor Bosman" wrote:
>
> Pretty much the same as us as well. 35 imap servers. 10 pop servers.
> clustered pair of 6080s, with about 250 15K disks. We're seeing some
> corruption as well. I myself am using imap extensively and regularly have
> problems with my inbox disap
On January 22, 2010 11:21:09 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
Or will there be a global index?
Yes. That's what dbox SIS is about. You have a global repository of
(large) MIME parts, indexed by their SHA1 sum (or something).
In the case of zfs then, the filesystem may as well do the dedup'ing.
On 22.1.2010, at 23.14, Frank Cusack wrote:
>> This is more or less what dbox's single instance storage is going to do.
>> Maybe in half a year or so.. And you don't even need filesystem
>> deduplication feature. :)
>
> But if the mail system has to handle it, it only knows about mails
> written
On January 22, 2010 11:05:22 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 15:53 -0500, Frank Cusack wrote:
In the future, it would be cool if there were a mailbox format (dbox2?)
where mail headers and each mime part were stored in separate files.
This would enable the zfs dedup feature
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 23:12 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> I don't have any evidence, but my logic goes like: Mail is written to
> disk once. Most users use a single client, which downloads the message
> once. Or maybe they're using webmail, and they read the same message
> approximately once (or m
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 16:09 -0500, Frank Cusack wrote:
> On January 22, 2010 11:05:22 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > Dunno about zfs, but I've heard that at least in one NetApp installation
> > deduplication was way too heavyweight.
>
> zfs dedup is pretty resources intensive -- for writes. F
On January 22, 2010 11:05:22 PM +0200 Timo Sirainen wrote:
Dunno about zfs, but I've heard that at least in one NetApp installation
deduplication was way too heavyweight.
zfs dedup is pretty resources intensive -- for writes. For mail I
suspect reads overwhelm writes?
-frank
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 17:05 -0400, Cor Bosman wrote:
> Is 1.2.10 imminent or should i just patch 1.2.9?
I'll try to get 1.2.10 out on Sunday. There are still some mails I
should read through and maybe fix some other stuff.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 23:05 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> It would also be possible to already write such Maildir feature. Someone
> on this list already wrote header/body separation code, which was pretty
> easy to do with a plugin.
Someone = Alex Baule
signature.asc
Description: This is a dig
> Wow, that's almost the exact same setup we use, except we have 10 IMAP/POP
> and a clustered pair of FAS920's with 10K drives which are getting replaced
> in a few weeks. We also have a pair of clustered 3050's, but they're not
> running dovecot (yet).
Pretty much the same as us as well. 35
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 15:53 -0500, Frank Cusack wrote:
> In the future, it would be cool if there were a mailbox format (dbox2?)
> where mail headers and each mime part were stored in separate files.
> This would enable the zfs dedup feature to be used to maximum benefit.
This is more or less what
In the future, it would be cool if there were a mailbox format (dbox2?)
where mail headers and each mime part were stored in separate files.
This would enable the zfs dedup feature to be used to maximum benefit.
In the zfs filesystem, there is a dedup feature which stores only 1 copy
of duplicate
We've thought about enabling IP-based session affinity on the load
balancer,
Brandon, I just thought of something. Have you always been running
without IP affinity across all your connections? We've always had it
turned on because we were under the impression that certain clients like
O
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 15:38 -0500, Frank Cusack wrote:
> For shared (between users) mailboxes, I am using a file dict.
>
> plugin {
> acl_shared_dict = file:/etc/dovecot/acl_shared_dict/shared.db
> }
>
> What is the format of this file? I would like to manage it directly
> rather than have SET
For shared (between users) mailboxes, I am using a file dict.
plugin {
acl_shared_dict = file:/etc/dovecot/acl_shared_dict/shared.db
}
What is the format of this file? I would like to manage it directly
rather than have SETACL update it. I see lines which describe a
sharing entry (the format
On 01/22/2010 01:15 PM, Brandon Davidson wrote:
We have a much similar setup - 8 POP/IMAP servers running RHEL 5.4,
Dovecot 1.2.9 (+ patches), F5 BigIP load balancer cluster
(active/standby) in a L4 profile distributing connections round-robin,
maildirs on two Netapp Filers (clustered 3070s with
On 01/22/2010 12:16 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
Looking at the problems with people using NFS it's pretty clear that this
solution just isn't going to work properly.
Actually, considering the amount of people and servers we're throwing at
it, I think that it's dealing with it pretty well. I'm
David,
> -Original Message-
> From: dovecot-bounces+brandond=uoregon@dovecot.org
[mailto:dovecot-
> Our physical setup is 10 Centos 5.4 x86_64 IMAP/POP servers, all with
> the same NFS backend where the index, control, and Maildir's for the
> users reside. Accessing this are direct con
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:18:31 +0100, Papp Tamás
wrote:
> Lex Brugman wrote, On 2010. 01. 12. 0:01:
>> [..]
>>
>> I can't think of anything to distinguish this behavior from a normal
>> delete action by any other mail client and using Shift-Delete in
>> Thunderbird (server-side), if you know one,
One more spam about this :)
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 19:54 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Then some kind of logic that:
>
> - if user already exists in user_connections table AND
> (imap_connections > 0 OR last_lookup>now() - 1 hour) use the old
> server_id
"AND new_connections_ok" also here. The i
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 19:54 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> - otherwise figure out a new server for it based on servers'
> connection_count and new_connections_ok.
Or in case of proxy_maybe and a external load balancer, maybe just use
the local server in this situation.
signature.asc
Description
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 19:31 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Better would be to have some kind of a database that externally monitors
> what servers are up and where users currently have connections, and
> based on that decide where to redirect a new connection. Although that's
> also slightly racy un
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 19:31 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> > Is this the situation we discussed once where a dovecot instance becomes a
> > proxy if it detects that a user should be on a different server?
>
> No, that was my 1) plan :) And this is already possible with
> proxy_maybe: http://wiki.d
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 13:23 -0400, Cor Bosman wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2010, at 1:19 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 19:16 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> >> 2) Long term solution will be for Dovecot to not use NFS server for
> >> inter-process communication, but instead connect to o
On Jan 22, 2010, at 1:19 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 19:16 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>> 2) Long term solution will be for Dovecot to not use NFS server for
>> inter-process communication, but instead connect to other Dovecot
>> servers directly via network.
>
> Actually n
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 19:16 +0200, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> 2) Long term solution will be for Dovecot to not use NFS server for
> inter-process communication, but instead connect to other Dovecot
> servers directly via network.
Actually not "NFS server", but "filesystem". So this would be done even
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 11:24 -0500, David Halik wrote:
> Unfortunately, he is of the opinion that there should rarely be any
> and
> there is a design flaw in how Dovecot is designed to work with
> multiple
> services with an NFS backend.
Well, he is pretty much correct. I thought I could add e
Timo (and anyone else who feels like chiming in),
I was just wondering if you'd be able to tell me if the amount of
corruption I see on a daily basis is what you consider "average" for our
current setup and traffic. Now that we are no longer experiencing any
core dumps with the latest patches
Tony Rutherford wrote:
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 20.1.2010, at 22.21, Attila Nagy wrote:
After running through http://wiki.dovecot.org/IndexFiles I'm not
sure how well would Dovecot work with other programs modifying the
maildirs (adding, deleting, moving messages, folders etc).
The "Main ind
Hi,
the latest revision of dovecot 1.1 tree (576020ceda60) produces errors
during compilation on Debian Lenny:
[...]
Making all in quota
make[4]: Entering directory
`/scratch/heiko/dovecot/dovecot-1-1-576020ceda60/src/plugins/quota'
if /bin/sh ../../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_
Mail client interacts with MTA (sendmail, postfix, exim, etc) and then
MTA 'calls' the delivery agent (LDA, some MTA, etc) to deliver the
mail to mailboxes. Common mail clients do not interact with delivery
agent directly, even it's inbound. So yes, you need MTA for inbound
mail.
HTH
Joseph
On F
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 16:42 +0100, spamv...@googlemail.com wrote:
> currently im using:
> user_attrs = homeDirectory=home,uid=mail=maildir:/mail/%$
> user_filter =
> (&(objectClass=gosaMailAccount)(|(mail=%u)(gosaMailAlternateAddress=%u)))
> to match the mailaddress and deliver the mail to the use
hi..
Dovecot Version 1.2.9
im trying to login to dovecot with my ldap uid.
currently im using:
user_attrs = homeDirectory=home,uid=mail=maildir:/mail/%$
user_filter =
(&(objectClass=gosaMailAccount)(|(mail=%u)(gosaMailAlternateAddress=%u)))
to match the mailaddress and deliver the mail to the u
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 16:28 +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Is there some config file option to switch off CONDSTORE
> support?
Set imap_capability string explicitly and Thunderbird won't use it. The
string shouldn't contain AUTH=* or STARTTLS. Easiest if you just:
telnet localhost 143
a login user
Hi folks,
Is there some config file option to switch off CONDSTORE
support?
Of course I checked the manual on the Wiki, but I haven't
seen CONDSTORE mentioned at all. Forgive me if I am too
blind to see.
Many thanx
Harri
On Fri, 2010-01-22 at 10:20 +0100, spamv...@googlemail.com wrote:
> im using ldap. what happens when i add a new ldap user and that user
> tryes to login to dovecot ?
> does dovecot create the mailbox on first login? or do i have to send a
> mail first ?
Dovecot tries to create the missing directo
Steffen Kaiser wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Tony Rutherford wrote:
We have our own delivery pushing messages to the /new and then /cur
folder
eventually. When I have an IMAP client attached, there is apparently
some
sort of race going on. I belie
On 01/22/2010 09:15 AM, Christian Rohmann wrote:
Just wanted to share the bad news:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541337
It seems that Dovecot is really showing the Mozilla Thunderbird team how
to read and use an RFC ;-)
Yeah, I brought this up yesterday. They've been tr
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 20.1.2010, at 22.21, Attila Nagy wrote:
After running through http://wiki.dovecot.org/IndexFiles I'm not sure how well
would Dovecot work with other programs modifying the maildirs (adding,
deleting, moving messages, folders etc).
The "Main index" section says "The
Just wanted to share the bad news:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=541337
It seems that Dovecot is really showing the Mozilla Thunderbird team how
to read and use an RFC ;-)
--
Christian Rohmann
Content Delivery Server u. Dienste
Network Engineering & Design
NETCOLOGNE Gesells
I saw something in the documentation called LDA that looked like it was
accepting some kind of connection and delivering mail into mailboxes.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Veiko Kukk wrote:
> Phil Howard wrote:
>
>> Does Dovecot really need a separate MTA for inbound mail?
>>
>
> Why do you t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 22 Jan 2010, Kārlis Repsons wrote:
On Thursday 21 January 2010 15:18:28 Steffen Kaiser wrote:
One thing, that Sieve is not able to do, is to
deliver to multiple users without re-sending the mail.
Just what did you mean by "multiple users"?
On Thursday 21 January 2010 15:18:28 Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> One thing, that Sieve is not able to do, is to
> deliver to multiple users without re-sending the mail.
Just what did you mean by "multiple users"?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Veiko Kukk escreveu:
Or can it receive
SMTP directly if there is no forwarding to do? What about spam/virus
filtering in that case?
Dovecot has nothing to do with smtp. You need MTA like postfix or exim
to deliver mail to mbox/maildir. Then dovecot can show those mailboxes
to client.
hi..
im using ldap. what happens when i add a new ldap user and that user
tryes to login to dovecot ?
does dovecot create the mailbox on first login? or do i have to send a
mail first ?
thx
Phil Howard wrote:
Does Dovecot really need a separate MTA for inbound mail?
Why do you thing it might need?
Or can it receive
SMTP directly if there is no forwarding to do? What about spam/virus
filtering in that case?
Dovecot has nothing to do with smtp. You need MTA like postfix or exim
59 matches
Mail list logo
