Quoting Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 09:49 +0100, Yates Ian Mr (ITCS) wrote:
I have just upgraded to dovecot 1.1.2 and am seeing lots of the
following panic messages filling up the error logs:
dovecot: Aug 29 09:34:32 Panic: IMAP(user): file index-sync.c: line 39
(i
Quoting Eric Jon Rostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Quoting Timo Sirainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
dovecot: Aug 29 09:34:32 Panic: IMAP(user): file index-sync.c: line 39
(index_mailbox_set_recent_uid): assertion failed:
(seq_range_exists(&ibox->recent_flags, uid))
This patc
Quoting Stan Hoeppner :
Johan Hendriks put forth on 11/3/2010 3:32 AM:
Hello, i am working primarly with FreeBSD, and the latest release has a
service called HAST.
See it as a mirrored disk over the network.
This is similar to the DRBD solution.
With CARP in the mix, when the master machin
Quoting Johan Hendriks :
I do not know how the rebuild goes with hast, if the master provider
goes down, like i said, i need to try and test it.
Maybe an question on the freebsd-fs mailing list will answer this.
More about HAST http://wiki.freebsd.org/HAST
Sounds/looks a lot like DRBD. The
Quoting Seth Mattinen :
Queue directories and clusters don't
mix well, but a read-heavy maildir/dbox environment shouldn't suffer the
same problem.
Why don't queue directories and clusters mix well? Is this a performance
issue only, or something worse?
~Seth
--
Eric Rostetter
The Departme
Quoting Timo Sirainen :
It depends on the locking scheme used by the filesystem. Working queue
directories (the ones where stuff comes and goes rapidly) is best suited
for a local FS anyway.
And when a server and its disk dies, the emails get lost :(
It would appear he is not talking about a
Quoting Timo Sirainen :
1) When writing the data, extract the attachments and write them to
different files. Add pointers to those files to the EXT_REF metadata.
Dovecot's message parsers should make this not-too-difficult to
implement.
I'd rather it did mime parts, rather than attachments. I
Quoting Guy :
I'm looking at the possibility of running a pair of servers with
Dovecot LDA/imap/pop3 using internal drives with DRBD and GFS (or
other clustered FS) for the mail storage and ext3 for the root drive.
I'm in testing right now with this setup. Two Dell PE 2900 servers
(quad core
Quoting Romer Ventura :
Last time i checked the free version of DRBD only supports 2 nodes.
Correct. But RHCS supports more, and works best with an off number
(to prevent cluster splits, etc).
The paid version supports 16 nodes.
I think there are some limits on that too... Like two read-
Okay, I'm cruising the wiki, and it is at best confusing to me. Maybe
someone on the list can help me out quickly?
Here is what I have:
dovecot 1.1.18, mbox format, currently no acl/namespace/etc. All works great.
What I want to be able to do:
Have an email account (or folder or mailbox) whi
Quoting Timo Sirainen :
You can't have per-user seen flags with mbox currently. So create a
public namespace with a maildir location and set up dovecot-acl file in
a way that allows only some specific users access to it. So for example:
To refresh, I want a shared account, but my system was Do
Quoting Eric Jon Rostetter :
But I can't figure out how to access it (either manuall via telnet as above,
or from a client, etc).
Never mind... Got it working now...
a0 select "shared/myfolder"
* FLAGS (\Answered \Flagged \Deleted \Seen \Draft)
* OK [PERMANENTFLAGS (\An
Quoting Charles Marcus :
On 9/18/2009, Matthias Andree (matthias.and...@gmx.de) wrote:
Ubuntu 8.04 is a long-term support release (desktop three years, server five
years), and it's natural that users will use that.
Yes.
It is also natural that critical servers should always be running the
l
Quoting Noel Butler :
On Fri, 2009-09-18 at 11:11 -0500, Eric Jon Rostetter wrote:
> I have never understood anyone who would use a distro for critical
> applications that forces them to use 3+ year old software.
Because it is stable and just plain works, of course.
Oh what rubbis
Quoting Noel Butler :
No... Really, I've got lots of machines on older distros (3+ years)
that are just plain stable and just plain work.
until they are owned.
Not a one has been owned yet. And why would they be since there
are regular security updates, and of course out-of-band security
Quoting Charles Marcus :
That said, the biggest reason I see for upgrading often, especially for
things like dovecot, is to take advantage of the performance
improvements and new capabilities/options.
I've not seen to many lately, but maybe that is due to differences in
say mbox versus maildir
To update an old thread...
I'm looking at the possibility of running a pair of servers with
Dovecot LDA/imap/pop3 using internal drives with DRBD and GFS (or
other clustered FS) for the mail storage and ext3 for the root drive.
I'm in testing right now with this setup. Two Dell PE 2900 serv
Quoting Mario Antonio :
How does the system behave when you shutdown one server, and bring
it back later ? (are you using an IP load balancer/heart beat etc ?)
I'm just using RHCS with GFS over DRBD. DRBD and LVM are started by
the system (not managed by the cluster) and everything else (in
Quoting Mario Antonio :
Any good documentation regarding building a RHCS with GFS over DRBD
...? (or just the Rethat web site ..)
I've got my internal docs, which I could be talked into sharing...
Other than that, the Red Hat docs and the DRBD docs are the best source.
Not a lot out there.
J
Quoting Timo Sirainen :
So if you really want Dovecot to be there, you need to use either
SQL (e.g. SQLite) or checkpassword passdb. Others can't just accept
all users without explicitly listing all of them. With SQL you could
do something like:
Why not ldap authentication off the MS AD?
Quoting Rick Romero :
Anyone used FileReplicationPro? I'm more interested in low
bandwidth, 'cheaper', replication.
Might work for an active-failover setup, but since I use active-active I
need something like DRBD instead.
Personally I wouldn't trust it for cluster type situations, and I k
Quoting Nicolas GRENECHE :
I plan to run a dovecot IMAPS and POPS service on our network. We
handle about 3 000 mailboxes. I thought first buying a topnotch server
(8 cores and 16 Go RAM) with equalogic iSCSI SAN SAS 15K for storage
backend.
Sounds like overkill to me, but if you have the mone
Quoting Nicolas GRENECHE :
It should be a future option, but index management will be more tricky
as you stated.
If you want to do any kind of clustering/failover, even in the future,
then I would go with iSCSI/SAN of some sort instead of NFS... Just my $0.02.
The other way to think about it
If one had a network-based NFS service of the user mail data, that would
mean that
1) it would be easy to upgrade servers (data wouldn't move as it would have
to if it was owned either by being directly connected to the mail server or
connected over iSCSI)
True for directly connected storage,
Quoting John Lyons :
I've spent a week looking at the likes of PVFS, GFS, Lustre and a whole
host of different systems, including pNFS (NFS 4.1)
At the risk of diverting the thread away from the SATA backend, is there
any recommendation for a fault tolerant file service.
Most people seem to b
Quoting Rodolfo Gonzalez Gonzalez :
has someone worked with DRBD (http://www.drbd.org) for HA of mail storage?
Yes.
if so, does it have stability issues?
None that I've run into.
comments and experiences are thanked :)
Works great for me (two machines, sharing via DRBD, using LVM+GFS,
Quoting Bernd Petrovitsch :
(Now) 25K mailboxes (with ~92GB data) on DRBD-6 (now old - the thing was
built in early 2006) with ext{3,4} on it. As long as heartbeat/
pacemaker/openais/whatever assures that it is mounted on at most one
host, no problems whatsoever with the filesystem as such.
I'
Quoting Stan Hoeppner :
Eric Rostetter put forth on 2/13/2010 11:02 PM:
I'm bowing out of this discussion, as I was using words in a non-precise
way, and it is clear that Stan is using them in a very precise way,
and hence we're not really discussing the same thing...
My fault for not thinkin
28 matches
Mail list logo
