Re: Order in which UIDs are assigned..

If it's less than 64 bits number and Dovecot is compiled as 64bit binary, I guess it should work. Otherwise it gets more or less random: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/file/17aac21b303d/src/lib-storage/index/maildir/maildir-filename.c#l117 That explains it. Thanks.

Re: Order in which UIDs are assigned..

n sequence has a lower mtime, fourth by copying them into "new" in proper ascending sequence (according to file name) and then giving them appropriate mtime related to their sequence. But no matter what i do, Dovecot assigns first UID to file 1494829006737776656 only. -Akash

Order in which UIDs are assigned..

it possible for IMAP to run seive on it when it migrates the files from new to cur and indexes them? I understand that this might not be a valid question as mail is delivered already so there is nothing to filter :-) -Akash

Re: Strange indexing behavior on HTML emails ..

Does this patch will need to reindex lucene ? Yes, unfortunately, it does. Phil Just confirming that the patch has solved it. Thanks. Though it was just a tiny glitch, it prevented so many mails from showing in the search results. And I feel even Solr will require re-indexing.

Re: Strange indexing behavior on HTML emails ..

Thanks for the report. Bug found. My bad. A patch is working its way through the internal process, and will be in the public tree soon. Cheers, Phil That was fast :-) Thanks. Will wait for the patch.

Re: Strange indexing behavior on HTML emails ..

Tried latest source from HG and with solr also apart from lucene which I tested previously. The problem with single quotes in HTML is still there. The revision: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/ad028a950248 should have solved it but the relevant code no longer exists in src/plugins/fts/

Re: Strange indexing behavior on HTML emails ..

The issue is probably linked to: http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot-cvs/2014-May/024462.html But that change-set was in 2014 and I am using Dovecot 2.2.19 so don't understand why I am still seeing this behavior. -Akash

Strange indexing behavior on HTML emails ..

test.eml content (single quotes in div but content/type header removed): - From: y...@yourself.com To: m...@myself.com Subject: Test Message ABCD 1234 - RESULT: OK. The email is found. What could be the reason for this? -Akash

Indexing fails with .. FIELDS_INDEX_EXTENSION).c_str() )' failed

ndexFileNames::FIELDS_INDEX_EXTENSION).c_str() )' failed. Aborted I am using dovecot 2:2.2.19-1~auto+7& libclucene-core1:i386 2.3.3.4-4 from debian wheezy backports. Please advice. -Akash

stemmer or no-stemmer..

of libstemmer altogether? Please help me through these confusions.. -Regards, Akash

Re: Dovecot v2.2 FTS is not indexing "text/html" emails...

Please ignore. This seems to be a issue with using indexes created by Dovecot v1 with v2. When I deleted the old indexes and created fresh with v2, results were as expected. On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On 04 Aug 2014, at 19:16, Akash wrote: > >> Thus

Re: Huge difference between the lucene index size created by v2.1 and v2.2

.2/rev/febedba15c7e > > That bug was actually already in v2.1, but because memory was always > allocated from stack it wasn't causing as many problems. > > On 18 Aug 2014, at 13:34, Akash wrote: > >> Thanks for checking. The patch didn't make any significant difference. Now

Re: Huge difference between the lucene index size created by v2.1 and v2.2

--- 1 nobody nogroup 46 Aug 18 11:30 segments_8n On 18-08-2014 14:17, Timo Sirainen wrote: On 18 Aug 2014, at 09:42, Akash wrote: 390M vs 1.5G. That is a huge difference in size. Why is that? Can you test if the attached patch shrinks it back? I had been planning on making that also configu

Re: Segmentation fault while indexing a large mailbox using doveadm..

lting (fingers crossed). Previously I tried binary packages from your own repo also: http://xi.rename-it.nl/debian/pool/testing-auto/dovecot-2.2/ But that exhibited even stranger behavior: http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2014-August/097362.html -Regards, Akash On 18-08-2014 14:29, Timo Sir

Huge difference between the lucene index size created by v2.1 and v2.2

2500 1.5G Aug 18 06:41 _5g.cfs -rw--- 1 2500 2500 20 Aug 18 06:41 segments.gen -rw--- 1 2500 2500 46 Aug 18 06:41 segments_az 390M vs 1.5G. That is a huge difference in size. Why is that? Thanks in advance. -Regards, Akash

Segmentation fault while indexing a large mailbox using doveadm..

Hi, I am having the same issue as: http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2014-April/095681.html although I am using the latest dovecot-core and dovecot-lucene packages from the debian sid repo which already has the patch (http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/5e42a8c18b51) mentioned in the abo

Dovecot v2.2 FTS is not indexing "text/html" emails...

or. Why is this so? -Regards, Akash

Dovecot v2.2 FTS is not indexing "text/html" emails...

dexing those emails which have Content-type as text/html. Thus if a mail is like this: Content-Type: text/html He is very good. It isn't shown in search by the squat indexes created using dovecot v2.2.13. I have done further testing on some sample emails which confirmed this behavior. Why is this so? -Regards, Akash