On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 14:21 +0200, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> > quota = fs:user:noenforcing
> Thanks.
>
> > I guess I should add all these extra parameters to the wiki page..
> Yes, please.
They're there now.
> I suppose CONTROL has to be shared by different dovecot instances so I can't
> simply put th
> quota = fs:user:noenforcing
Thanks.
> I guess I should add all these extra parameters to the wiki page..
Yes, please.
I suppose CONTROL has to be shared by different dovecot instances so I can't
simply put them on local storage like INXEX, right?
On Oct 20, 2008, at 1:21 PM, Edgar Fuß wrote:
Dovecot doesn't try to enforce filesystem quota limits.
I'm admittedly feeling utterly stupid in trying to tell an author
what his programm is doing, but ...
It just handles the EDQUOT error from write().
... I ktrace'd imap and there was no fai
> Dovecot doesn't try to enforce filesystem quota limits.
I'm admittedly feeling utterly stupid in trying to tell an author what his
programm is doing, but ...
> It just handles the EDQUOT error from write().
... I ktrace'd imap and there was no failing write(), only suspicious rpcs to
the file
On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 21:24 +0200, Edgar Fuß wrote:
> Yes. I could spend more time testing this myself or examining the code.
> It looks to me that, with fs quota, dovecot refuses to store a mail
> (e.g. when the client moves a mail from one IMAP folder to another)
> if the user is beyond his s
Yes. I could spend more time testing this myself or examining the code.
It looks to me that, with fs quota, dovecot refuses to store a mail
(e.g. when the client moves a mail from one IMAP folder to another)
if the user is beyond his soft limit.
Is this correct/intended? Knowing nothing about
