On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 03:43:08AM +, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 5.11.2010, at 22.08, The Doctor wrote:
>
> >> You mean POP3 client keeps downloading the same mail again? Usually
> >> seems to be Outlook bug..
> >
> > I am seeing this with M$ Outlook/OE/Mail/Entourage & Apple Mail.
> >
> >
On 5.11.2010, at 22.08, The Doctor wrote:
>> You mean POP3 client keeps downloading the same mail again? Usually
>> seems to be Outlook bug..
>
> I am seeing this with M$ Outlook/OE/Mail/Entourage & Apple Mail.
>
> Can this be debugged?
Yes, it can. But before doing anything, dovecot -n outpu
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 03:53:38PM +, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 03:38 -0600, The Doctor wrote:
>
> > Question: How can one debug the pop3 process from repeated e-mail ?
>
> You mean POP3 client keeps downloading the same mail again? Usually
> seems to be Outlook bug..
>
On 11/04/2010 06:51 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 5.11.2010, at 1.35, RParr wrote:
Could someone verify if 1) sieve can fileinto shared public mbox?
I don't see any reason why it wouldn't.
2) if it can, what I might be doing wrong?
Set mail_debug=yes and post logs. Also fu
On 11/5/2010 11:02 AM, Henrique Fernandes wrote:
Can dovecot-lda, keep a copy of any email that it receives in a diferente
folder ?
Like if u...@domain.com get an email. It goes to u...@domain.com inbox and
goes to other folder..diferente that his mailboxes ?
I want this with all users. Can it
On 11/5/2010 8:00 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Ralf Hildebrandt:
I uploaded a preliminary screenshot with comments:
http://www.arschkrebs.de/bugs/dovecot.png
During the night we're using clamdscan to scan mailboxes for viruses,
this results in the big block of system& user from 0:00 until ab
Can dovecot-lda, keep a copy of any email that it receives in a diferente
folder ?
Like if u...@domain.com get an email. It goes to u...@domain.com inbox and
goes to other folder..diferente that his mailboxes ?
I want this with all users. Can it be done ?
If not, does any one have any ideia how
Il giorno 20/ott/2010, alle ore 18.20, Jose Luis Faria ha scritto:
> Hello people,
>
> I am using now qmail in cluster with LDAP + Interscan Messaging Security
> Suite from Trendmicro.
>
> I need to develop a new solution with:
> - postfix
> - dovecot
> - anti-spam
> - anti-malware.
>
> I am
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 13:58 -0200, Alex Baule wrote:
> the SQL Backend for the ExtraField, have a cache ?
>
> Or if 300 users connects to the IMAP 10 times, the backend will get 300 X 10
> connections to the database ?
The extra fields come as part of the userdb lookup (by auth process)
that is
Timo,
the SQL Backend for the ExtraField, have a cache ?
Or if 300 users connects to the IMAP 10 times, the backend will get 300 X 10
connections to the database ?
2010/11/5 Timo Sirainen
> On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 11:40 -0200, Alex Baule wrote:
> > There is a native way to set/get a configurati
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 03:38 -0600, The Doctor wrote:
> Question: How can one debug the pop3 process from repeated e-mail ?
You mean POP3 client keeps downloading the same mail again? Usually
seems to be Outlook bug..
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 15:25 +, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Anyway, I'd think the used system time is owned by some process(es).
> Would be interesting to know what kind of logs you get with the attached
> patch (e.g. run dovecot for an hour..day, stop it, gather all logs,
> count the used system ti
* Timo Sirainen :
> There's a lot more of IPC going on now. Each process at startup connects
> to config process to read configuration (vs. reading it from environment
> variables).
OK
> State tracking is done in anvil process (vs. master process
> internally).
anvil is completely new, I noti
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 15:08 +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > > I'm wondering if the problem has to do with the way processes now do
> > > IPC
> >
> > That could very well be. Lots of time is spent in the kernel
>
> What exactly has changed - and what kind of data are the processes
> exchanging
* Ed W :
> Hi Ralf
>
> Not sure how your setup is arranged, but do you perhaps have the
> opportunity to do a "partial upgrade" and switch say only POP or only
> IMAP users to 2.0? (Or only "deliver"?)
Well, why not. It's possible. It's all in place.
What I had was using pop3s & imap & imaps fro
Hi Ralf
Not sure how your setup is arranged, but do you perhaps have the
opportunity to do a "partial upgrade" and switch say only POP or only
IMAP users to 2.0? (Or only "deliver"?) The thought is that you might
narrow down it down a little?
I'm thinking if you use a virtualisation solutio
* Ralf Hildebrandt :
> I uploaded a preliminary screenshot with comments:
> http://www.arschkrebs.de/bugs/dovecot.png
>
> During the night we're using clamdscan to scan mailboxes for viruses,
> this results in the big block of system & user from 0:00 until about
> 08:00
Yesterday (08:00-18:00)
h
On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 11:40 -0200, Alex Baule wrote:
> There is a native way to set/get a configuration to one plugin, to various
> users ?
Return it from userdb:
http://wiki2.dovecot.org/UserDatabase/ExtraFields#Overriding_settings
* Robert Schetterer :
> Hi Ralph , ia still not clear about your problem
> i understand that you do something with clam and there is difference
> between dovocot versions , am i right ?
No. clamd is not involved.
dovecot-2.0.x : slow
dovecot-1.2.x : pretty fast
same machine, same users, same us
Am 05.11.2010 15:15, schrieb Ralf Hildebrandt:
> * Charles Marcus :
>> On 2010-11-05 10:05 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>>> * Charles Marcus :
>>>
Hmmm... maybe dovecot 2.0 is doing something different from 1.2 that
causes your *live* clamdscan at delivery time to produce the heavier
>>
On 2010-11-05 10:15 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Charles Marcus :
>> You plainly state that you *do* run clamdscan on delivery...
> Not on this machine.
Gotcha...
--
Best regards,
Charles
* Charles Marcus :
> On 2010-11-05 10:05 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > * Charles Marcus :
> >
> >> Hmmm... maybe dovecot 2.0 is doing something different from 1.2 that
> >> causes your *live* clamdscan at delivery time to produce the heavier
> >> load...
> >
> > Clamdscan is not running at de
On 2010-11-05 10:05 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Charles Marcus :
>
>> Hmmm... maybe dovecot 2.0 is doing something different from 1.2 that
>> causes your *live* clamdscan at delivery time to produce the heavier load...
>
> Clamdscan is not running at delivery time on that box, it's running o
> > I'm wondering if the problem has to do with the way processes now do
> > IPC
>
> That could very well be. Lots of time is spent in the kernel
What exactly has changed - and what kind of data are the processes
exchanging via IPCs?
And which processes are talking to each other?
--
Ralf Hilde
* Charles Marcus :
> Hmmm... maybe dovecot 2.0 is doing something different from 1.2 that
> causes your *live* clamdscan at delivery time to produce the heavier load...
Clamdscan is not running at delivery time on that box, it's running on
another machine.
On my graph I labeled the NIGHTLY sca
* Robert Schetterer :
> Hi Ralph, high cpu load is common with clamscan
We're not talking about the times where clamdscan is running.
It's ONLY running at night. That's why I labeled the graph accordingly.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsme
On 2010-11-05 9:18 AM, David Ford wrote:
> -d
>
> -- Linux - freedom to build is good Please top-post and trim when
> replying to my messages.
David, once was funny, and even better when replying to a message from
someone who has a 'real' 'disclaimer' sig - but I sure hope you're not
plannin
There is a native way to set/get a configuration to one plugin, to various
users ?
Like this:
my_plugin{
user_a=configurations
user_b=configurations
user_..
user_z=configurations
}
I Have plugin and it can be enable/disabled by user. And i have a lot of
users, like 10
On 2010-11-05 8:56 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * David Ford :
>> why don't you run clamdscan on delivery?
> I do.
On 2010-11-05 9:33 AM, Robert Schetterer wrote:
> Hi Ralph, high cpu load is common with clamscan
Hmmm... maybe dovecot 2.0 is doing something different from 1.2 that
causes your *
Am 05.11.2010 10:58, schrieb Ralf Hildebrandt:
> * Ralf Hildebrandt :
>> Due to the ongoing performance issues with 2.0.x I switched back to
>> 1.2.15 yesterday evening, with no changes to the machine or my users.
>>
>> (I migrated from 1.2.15 to 2.0.x by converting the existing config)
>>
>> Today
On 11/5/10 9:17 AM, Ed W wrote:
compare. Unfortunately I don't have a test system available to do all
the mailbox types. I can only test mbox on my production system. That
When you rebuild your server, switch to some kind of virtualisation
option! Never again will you not have a test architectu
* David Ford :
> on my networks, AV and anti-spam hooks are via sendmail/milter and get
> called for all smtp regardless of direction which means an infected
> desktop won't be able to transmit spam.
same here.
> thus, running a nightly scan on mailboxes after delivery means the
> above - save
compare. Unfortunately I don't have a test system available to do all
the mailbox types. I can only test mbox on my production system. That
When you rebuild your server, switch to some kind of virtualisation
option! Never again will you not have a test architecture or any issue
in spinnin
On 11/05/10 08:56, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> I'm only scanning directories that haven't been scanned for a long time
> (I cannot scan all the boxes in one night). Main purpose is to remove
> freshly detected viruses/spam that wasn't in the patterns at delivery
> time.
>
> The benefit is somewhat
* Ralf Hildebrandt :
> * zhong ming wu :
>
> > > Left of "switching back to 1.2.x" is 2.0
> > > Right of "switching back to 1.2.x" is 1.2.x
> >
> > i thought "switching back to 1.2.x" is title of that graph.
> > Since you know your server better I assume that you expect data with
> > 2.0 after 18
* David Ford :
> why don't you run clamdscan on delivery?
I do.
> that way you only scan each email once, not repeatedly every night
> until it's deleted.
I'm only scanning directories that haven't been scanned for a long time
(I cannot scan all the boxes in one night). Main purpose is to remov
* Timo Sirainen :
> On 5.11.2010, at 9.58, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> > I uploaded a preliminary screenshot with comments:
> > http://www.arschkrebs.de/bugs/dovecot.png
>
> Were you using v1.2's deliver here in left also? Or how much of a difference
> did that make alone?
2.0 was indeed using
* zhong ming wu :
> > Left of "switching back to 1.2.x" is 2.0
> > Right of "switching back to 1.2.x" is 1.2.x
>
> i thought "switching back to 1.2.x" is title of that graph.
> Since you know your server better I assume that you expect data with
> 2.0 after 18:00 to be high like before.
No. I ex
On 2010-11-05 08:27:30 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-11-04 7:28 PM, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> > On 2010-11-04 15:57:31 -0700, Asai wrote:
> >> Is it possible to automatically authenticate Dovecot users using
> >> the same type of mechanism which makes Postfix able to simply check
> >> SMTP
why don't you run clamdscan on delivery? that way you only scan each email
once, not repeatedly every night until it's deleted.
-david
On 11/05/10 05:58, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> During the night we're using clamdscan to scan mailboxes for viruses,
> this results in the big block of system & u
On 2010-11-04 7:28 PM, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
> On 2010-11-04 15:57:31 -0700, Asai wrote:
>> Is it possible to automatically authenticate Dovecot users using
>> the same type of mechanism which makes Postfix able to simply check
>> SMTP users using the mynetworks variable?
>>
>> Basically I would
On 5.11.2010, at 9.58, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> I uploaded a preliminary screenshot with comments:
> http://www.arschkrebs.de/bugs/dovecot.png
Were you using v1.2's deliver here in left also? Or how much of a difference
did that make alone?
How many imap logins per minute (or something) do you
On 5.11.2010, at 7.54, Per Jessen wrote:
> In my email archiving setup, no user will have an inbox (regular mail is
> taken care of by another system). Is it not possible to configure a
> dovecot setup without an inbox?
No. Also many clients require INBOX to exist and would probably break if it
Setting up namespaces like this on an ubuntu maverick server HAS accomplished
allowing sendmail to deliver email to /var/mail/jon in mbox format and then,
using a thunderbird client from another machine, drag email's to Maildir type
folders in ~/Maildir on that remote server.
My question is, once
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
wrote:
> * zhong ming wu :
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
>> wrote:
>> > I uploaded a preliminary screenshot with comments:
>> > http://www.arschkrebs.de/bugs/dovecot.png
>> >
>>
>> Unclear from your graphs what is for 2.0 and
* zhong ming wu :
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
> wrote:
> > I uploaded a preliminary screenshot with comments:
> > http://www.arschkrebs.de/bugs/dovecot.png
> >
>
> Unclear from your graphs what is for 2.0 and what is for 1.2
Left of "switching back to 1.2.x" is 2.0
Right o
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 5:58 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
wrote:
> I uploaded a preliminary screenshot with comments:
> http://www.arschkrebs.de/bugs/dovecot.png
>
Unclear from your graphs what is for 2.0 and what is for 1.2
Plotting the same variable for 2.0 and 1.2 data on the same graph will
be more c
* Ralf Hildebrandt :
> Due to the ongoing performance issues with 2.0.x I switched back to
> 1.2.15 yesterday evening, with no changes to the machine or my users.
>
> (I migrated from 1.2.15 to 2.0.x by converting the existing config)
>
> Today, we have MUCH LESS load, with the same number of log
I know I have brought this up before.
Question: How can one debug the pop3 process from repeated e-mail ?
--
Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca
God, Queen and country! Never Satan President Republic! Beware AntiChrist
rising!
http://twitter.com/roo
Due to the ongoing performance issues with 2.0.x I switched back to
1.2.15 yesterday evening, with no changes to the machine or my users.
(I migrated from 1.2.15 to 2.0.x by converting the existing config)
Today, we have MUCH LESS load, with the same number of logins/min.
I cannot say what exact
In my email archiving setup, no user will have an inbox (regular mail is
taken care of by another system). Is it not possible to configure a
dovecot setup without an inbox?
/Per Jessen, Zürich
Timo Sirainen put forth on 11/4/2010 6:24 PM:
> On 4.11.2010, at 23.09, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> That shows that mdbox is twice as fast as maildir for uncached searches,
>> which I'm guessing are the majority of searches. I'd really be
>> interested in seeing numbers for mbox as well.
>
> Here'
52 matches
Mail list logo
