Hello,
I am having a problem with my dovecot-daemon. It is forking one or more
(I saw up to perhaps 8 of them) imap processes under my user name. These
processes are consuming a lot of CPU time and are not killable:
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND
> 8616 arn
Timo Sirainen wrote:
> If you can't kill a process with -9, the bug is in the kernel and
Do you have an idea, where and how I could report this to? (against the
kernel package?). Perhaps I try an original debian kernel instead the
sidux kernel first.
> there's nothing Dovecot can do about it. Use
Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Anyway, Arno's ps output showed the process to be in R state, not in D
It is definitely the R state.
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND
6717 arno 20 0 2964 1608 1192 R 100 0.2 1158:05 imap
btw: I have switched from imaps to im
Timo Sirainen wrote:
> You could see if compiling Dovecot without inotify/dnotify support would
> help. I can't really think of anything else.
I would like to try this and report the result. But there are so many
configure-options that I do not know which options (and how) I should
dis/enable. Cou
Timo Sirainen wrote:
Or does it make more sense to try another kernel first?
I guess that could also help.
I started testing this with another kernel (2.6.26-6.slh.1-sidux-686).
Until now (the last 15 hours) no such failing imap process did show up.
So I guess it happens with 2.6.27 kerne
Cor Bosman wrote:
It seemed to be NFS related in our case.
Is your Maildir directory mounted via NFS?
I am using NFS-mounts, but not in connection with dovecot.
Greetings,
Arno
David Rosenstrauch wrote:
Has anyone reported this over on LKML yet? Or filed a bug?
I did not yet. First I would like to test my self compiled dovecot
without inotify against 2.6.27. Second I do not know where and how to
report kernel issues. (Also I am a little bit afraid of the whole kern
A new status report regarding this issue:
Dovecot on my PC in the office is still running fine with kernel 2.6.26.
Dovecot with the latest kernel 2.6.27-9.slh.1-sidux-686 on my PC at home
did show the unkillable imap processes after a few minutes.
Now I am running dovecot compiled without in
Timo Sirainen wrote:
One more thing you could try: Does the hang happen if you use configure
--with-notify=dnotify ?
I do not know if this is still interesting. But after notify=none did
run for more than 3 hours without any problems, I am now testing dnotify
since approximately 30 minutes wi
Timo Sirainen wrote:
One more thing you could try: Does the hang happen if you use configure
--with-notify=dnotify ?
I first will keep the current version running for some hours to be more
sure it really does not make problems. After this I can test it with
dnotify.
Thanks,
Arno
Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 12:00 +0100, Arno Wald wrote:
So where are kernel issues reported? I will try to find out.
Linux kernel mailing list is probably the best place. I could also write
a summary mail about this and Cc it to you all who have had the problem.
I would
I have running the older debian/sid dovecot 1:1.0.15-2.3 again, now with
kernel 2.6.27-10.slh.1-sidux-686 and the issue seems to be fixed. So I
recommend to use at least 2.6.27.10.
Bye, Arno.
Hallo,
I am running dovecot on a PC (a workstation) to have a mail client
independent storage for my mails. Now I would like to have the system
clock set correctly by using ntpd or ntpdate (using debian/sid).
The problem is, that the PC is not online at boot time, but is set
online on demand
Scott Haneda wrote:
Can you explain why the system clock gets so far out of time?
No, I cannot, I do not know. Is it possible that the clock is out of order?
I did compare the times with another PC that is ntpd controlled. And
after 1 hour the times differ for 1 second again. It seems that my
Timo Sirainen wrote:
> Wonder if http://cr.yp.to/clockspeed.html would work better than ntpd?
This is interesting, thank you. I will give it a try if ntpd or ntpdate
will be no solution for me. But as there is no package for this in
debian I would like to use the ntp stuff instead first.
Arn
John Gateley wrote:
> 2 things might help:
Thank you for your suggestions. This reminded me of an ntpdate option:
ntpdate can be configured to change the time not in a big step on
startup by using the option
-B
Force the time to always be slewed using the adjtime() system call,
even if the
Pascal Volk wrote:
On Debian systems I'm very happy with the OpenBSD NTP daemon.
Package: openntpd
This ntpd adjusts the local time in little steps.
Also on startup? ntpd uses little steps while running, too. But only at
startup it seems to do a big step.
But as I have found in the Debian-Ch
Juergen Daubert wrote:
Chrony is what you are looking for, see http://chrony.sunsite.dk/
chrony does exactly look like what I need. But there is one big
disadvantage when using it on manual dial up PCs: You have to configure
the NTP-servers by IP-address instead of there names. I do not like
Arno Wald wrote:
It would be much better if chrony would look up the server addresses
again when it does recieve the "online" state command. It seems that
there is no option to turn on such a functionality.
For completeness, even if it is getting OT in this mailing list (Sor
Timo Sirainen wrote:
Hmm. I suppose I could change Dovecot master so that if no imap/pop3
processes have been created yet, it would silently ignore the clock move.
Also it might be an idea to just restart dovecot instead of completely
stopping it. If this happens to often in a certain time int
Timo Sirainen wrote:
http://wiki.dovecot.org/TimeMovedBackwards bottom answers this. A
restart isn't much better than just ignoring the time change.
In point 3 ("you can use clockspeed as well") you could mention
"chrony", too:
http://chrony.sunsite.dk/
Thank you,
Arno
Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
but I think it's not so trivial to handle this properly, without risking data
loss (as Timo pointed out, immediately restarting is not really helping, since
you'll still be running in the past.
It would be interesting (as I do not know anything about the dovecot
inte
Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
>> In point 3 ("you can use clockspeed as well") you could mention
>> "chrony", too:
> That page has an edit button, so feel free!
Done. I hope I have not destroyed anything.
Bye, Arno.
Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 6/10/2009, Arno Wald (arno.w...@netcologne.de) wrote:
>> Why is the time that the mail server is running in important for this
>> management?
>
> No offense, but are you serious?
Well, I really meant the question seriously. A server gets m
24 matches
Mail list logo
