* Timo Sirainen :
> On 3.11.2010, at 10.34, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> >> ln -s /var/run/dovecot /usr/local/var/run/dovecot
> >
> > ln -s /usr/dovecot-2/var/run/dovecot /var/run/dovecot
>
> That symlink probably gets deleted at system bootup.
>
> > (since /var/run/dovecot didn't exist here, I
On 3.11.2010, at 10.34, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> ln -s /var/run/dovecot /usr/local/var/run/dovecot
>
> ln -s /usr/dovecot-2/var/run/dovecot /var/run/dovecot
That symlink probably gets deleted at system bootup.
> (since /var/run/dovecot didn't exist here, I have everything below
> --prefix=/u
* Timo Sirainen :
> No. If it can't read the config socket (which it can't by default), it
> silently fallbacks to executing doveconf.
:)
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-122
* Timo Sirainen :
> On 3.11.2010, at 7.51, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> >> service config {
> >> unix_listener config {
> >>mode = 0666
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >> Now dovecot-lda and others will read the config from the socket rather
> >> than executing doveconf.
> >
> > I will test this immed
On 3.11.2010, at 10.32, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> Forgot to mention: This requires that base_dir hasn't been changed from the
>> built-in default. But that can also be worked around with symlinks, e.g.:
>>
>> ln -s /var/run/dovecot /usr/local/var/run/dovecot
>
> Well, dovecot itself seems to b
* Timo Sirainen :
> On 3.11.2010, at 7.51, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> >> service config {
> >> unix_listener config {
> >>mode = 0666
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >> Now dovecot-lda and others will read the config from the socket rather
> >> than executing doveconf.
> >
> > I will test this immed
On 3.11.2010, at 7.51, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> service config {
>> unix_listener config {
>>mode = 0666
>> }
>> }
>>
>> Now dovecot-lda and others will read the config from the socket rather
>> than executing doveconf.
>
> I will test this immediately!!
Forgot to mention: This requires
* Timo Sirainen :
> On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 15:46 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>
> > on the morning I was running "dovecot-lda" for local delivery, but
> > then switched to the old 1.2.x deliver for performance reasons.
>
> If the slowness is caused by config parsing, that's actually easy to
> av
On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 15:46 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> on the morning I was running "dovecot-lda" for local delivery, but
> then switched to the old 1.2.x deliver for performance reasons.
If the slowness is caused by config parsing, that's actually easy to
avoid:
service config {
unix_li
* Timo Sirainen :
> On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 11:44 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > I traced around a bit today, in dovecot-lda.
> > A pattern I'm seeing quite often is this:
> >
> > 0.000853 open("/usr/dovecot-2/lib/dovecot/settings",
> > O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK|O_LARGEFILE|O_DIRECTORY|O_CLOEXE
On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 11:44 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> I traced around a bit today, in dovecot-lda.
> A pattern I'm seeing quite often is this:
>
> 0.000853 open("/usr/dovecot-2/lib/dovecot/settings",
> O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK|O_LARGEFILE|O_DIRECTORY|O_CLOEXEC) = 7
> 0.000463 fcntl64
* Ralf Hildebrandt :
> I traced around a bit today, in dovecot-lda.
> A pattern I'm seeing quite often is this:
I also actived system accounting and found this:
# sa -l |egrep "(deliver|dovecot-lda)"
17365 277.05re 5.98u 159.69s 0avio 1489k
dovecot-lda
17951
* Timo Sirainen :
> > My idea is to turn back on logging and then trace the dovecot/log
> > process using
> >
> > strace -p PID -c
>
> -tt is also nice.
I traced around a bit today, in dovecot-lda.
A pattern I'm seeing quite often is this:
0.000853 open("/usr/dovecot-2/lib/dovecot/setti
* Timo Sirainen :
> > OK. I never bothered, because I never had problems :)
> >
> > I think dovecot could benefit from a diagram like the "Postfix big
> > picture" where all daemons are listed and their relations/dependencies.
>
> Yeah, I guess I should draw something some day. :)
Postfix is a
On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 09:51 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Timo Sirainen :
>
> > With v1.2 all logging also went through dovecot master process,
>
> OK. I never bothered, because I never had problems :)
>
> I think dovecot could benefit from a diagram like the "Postfix big
> picture" where
* Timo Sirainen :
> With v1.2 all logging also went through dovecot master process,
OK. I never bothered, because I never had problems :)
I think dovecot could benefit from a diagram like the "Postfix big
picture" where all daemons are listed and their relations/dependencies.
> each using thei
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 16:47 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > with everything else it goes through "dovecot/log" process.
>
> Interesting: 1400+ processes logging through one process...
> Has this changed from 1.2?
With v1.2 all logging also went through dovecot master process, each
using their
* Timo Sirainen :
> > Process: No special process was peaking. How is the logging
> > implemented? Each imap process is logging by itself?
>
> dovecot-lda logs directly,
OK!
> with everything else it goes through "dovecot/log" process.
Interesting: 1400+ processes logging through one process.
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 15:47 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > > > Colleague returned from vacation today and gave some ideas.
> > > > Today I turned off the "mail_log" and "notify" plugins and the load
> > > > dropped considerably. Both plugins were used with default settings.
> > Load as in I/O l
* Timo Sirainen :
> On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 13:42 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > * Ralf Hildebrandt :
> >
> > > Colleague returned from vacation today and gave some ideas.
> > > Today I turned off the "mail_log" and "notify" plugins and the load
> > > dropped considerably. Both plugins were used
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 13:42 +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> * Ralf Hildebrandt :
>
> > Colleague returned from vacation today and gave some ideas.
> > Today I turned off the "mail_log" and "notify" plugins and the load
> > dropped considerably. Both plugins were used with default settings.
>
> I
* Ralf Hildebrandt :
> Colleague returned from vacation today and gave some ideas.
> Today I turned off the "mail_log" and "notify" plugins and the load
> dropped considerably. Both plugins were used with default settings.
I left all settings unchanged and examined the machine. Load stays
low, so
* Daniel L. Miller :
> Now wait a minute! You said you found the problem and it was exactly
> what I suggested! I've already received my prize for most
> intelligent @ss in a discussion group - you can't take that away from
> me!
Yes I can.
*it gone*
> What changed? You turned off FTS, perfor
On 10/12/2010 4:25 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Ralf Hildebrandt:
I wonder if the old files from 1.2.5 were still valid with 2.0.5...
But given identical clients and user behaviour (all I changed was the
dovecot version), one would expect both 1.2.x and 2.0.x behave
identical in terms of loa
* Ralf Hildebrandt :
> I wonder if the old files from 1.2.5 were still valid with 2.0.5...
>
> But given identical clients and user behaviour (all I changed was the
> dovecot version), one would expect both 1.2.x and 2.0.x behave
> identical in terms of load.
I put some more effort into the ana
On 8.10.2010, at 12.55, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> Has the implementation of FTS changed in some way? Reading the two
> wikis doesn't yield any important difference. My clients/users surely
> have not changed!
No.. I haven't touched Squat for a long time. Then again, I haven't really
tried it muc
* m...@eulberg.name :
> I guess it will not be logged.
It would probably happen too often.
> Wiki says:
> The Squat indexes are stored among Dovecot's other index files. They're
> called dovecot.index.search and dovecot.index.search.uids. It's safe to
> delete both of these files to trigger a
> * m...@eulberg.name :
>
> > > Oh my god, load is down this morning. WOW.
> > >
> > > But what has changed?
> >
> >
> > Perhaps:
> > "The initial Squat index building for large mailboxes can be very CPU and
> memory hungry." -> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Plugins/FTS/Squat
>
> Should that info be l
* m...@eulberg.name :
> > Oh my god, load is down this morning. WOW.
> >
> > But what has changed?
>
>
> Perhaps:
> "The initial Squat index building for large mailboxes can be very CPU and
> memory hungry." -> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Plugins/FTS/Squat
Should that info be logged? Also: since
> > ># FullTextSearch
> > > fts = squat
> >
> > I'm probably talking out of the wrong hole again - but have you tried
> > removing squat from your plugin list to see if it makes a difference?
>
> Oh my god, load is down this morning. WOW.
>
> But what has changed?
Perhaps:
"The initial Squat
* Daniel L. Miller :
> ># FullTextSearch
> > fts = squat
>
> I'm probably talking out of the wrong hole again - but have you tried
> removing squat from your plugin list to see if it makes a difference?
Oh my god, load is down this morning. WOW.
But what has changed? My old 1.2.x config ALSO
* Daniel L. Miller :
> ># plugin Konfiguration
> >plugin {
> >
> ># mailboxen anlegen und subscriben
> > autocreate = Trash
> > autocreate2 = spam
> > autocreate3 = Sent
> > autocreate4 = Drafts
> > autosubscribe = Trash
> > autosubscribe2 = spam
> > autosubscribe3 = Sent
> > autos
On 10/7/2010 8:16 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Since I have these performance problems after migration to 2.0.5 I'm
publishing my config for review. Can anybody spot any obvious signs of
trouble?
# plugin Konfiguration
plugin {
# mailboxen anlegen und subscriben
autocreate = Trash
autoc
Since I have these performance problems after migration to 2.0.5 I'm
publishing my config for review. Can anybody spot any obvious signs of
trouble?
# 2.0.5: /usr/local/etc/dovecot.conf
# OS: Linux 2.6.32-24-generic-pae i686 Debian squeeze/sid
auth_debug = yes
auth_debug_passwords = yes
auth_mec
34 matches
Mail list logo