For further testing and because I could not figure the limitation, I just
duplicated the dovecot nodes multiple times and loadbalanced over them with
primitive roundrobin TCP.
With every increase of instances I could load the system more and got almost
linear scaling until about 16 instances w
Hello,
I am running a test setup in a docker stack with Dovecot (2.3.21). Basically as
a test to see whats possible.
The whole thing works okay, but I noticed that with imaptest (latest version)
somewhere between 230 and 270 requests per second on a login+logout cycle it
cannot go further. How
(Resending because of size limit exceeded on previous post)
Hi Jens
that looks much better, though not yet completely solved. What you're
now getting is both rules firing when you move a message to Junk,
whereas you only want the first one firing. I guess you will have no
rules firing when yo
Gotcha
It looks like you nailed it John! (Log and config attached)
The log looks now very different and my log entry is also shown.
Now I can continue working at this point. Adjusting the events i.e.
The reason was actually simple - but I spent a few evenings searching and was
bl
> imap(mail@test.example)<1797>: Debug: sieve: include:
> sieve_global is not set; it is currently not possible to include `:global'
> scripts.
i am running dovecot 2.3.21 on ubuntu 24.04.
while i was casting about trying to get the spam learning sieve going (it nows
works beautifully), i took
Hi Jens
just one update and some more insight looking at the code
Your causes should be COPY APPEND (whether applying proposed solution
(1) or (2). I updated inline below for solution (2).
Logic for that: I was testing from Thunderbird which is generating a
MOVE event. In the imapsieve plugi
Hi Jens
that log looks to me like it is for moving a message from Inbox to Junk
rather than Junk to Inbox.
The issue I see is that how you defined the rules does not match your
namespace naming scheme. Event being received is the following. In that
event you can see the name of the mailbox i
Hi John!
You are of course absolutely right - wild experimentation is rarely a good
approach. But you are surely familiar with the situation when you have done
everything logical and then, in your desperation, you start to change things
that you would not otherwise change ;)
I've actually gott
