I am migrating mailboxes from a 32 bit cyrus (cyrus-2.3.7) to a 64 bit
cyrus (2.3.13) server
When I copy the mailbox seen flags(skiplist) from the 32 bit server to
the 64 bit servers it does not work. All the mails are flagged as unseen
on the new server
Is there a way I can migrate the seen fl
>
> There's a significant upfront cost to learning a whole new system
> for one killer feature, especially if it comes along with signifiant
> regressions in lots of other features (like a non-sucky userland
> out of the box).
...
The "non-sucky" userland comment is simply a matter of preference,
Bron Gondwana wrote:
> BUT - if someone is asking "what's the best filesystem to use
> on Linux" and gets told ZFS, and by the way you should switch
> operating systems and ditch all the rest of your custom setup/
> experience then you're as bad as a Linux weenie saying "just
> use Cyrus on Linux"
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 08:01:04AM -0800, Vincent Fox wrote:
> (Summary of filesystem discussion)
>
> You left out ZFS.
Just to come back to this - I should say that I'm a big fan
of ZFS and what Sun have done with filesystem design. Despite
the issues we've had with that machine, I know it's gr
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 08:57:18PM -0800, Robert Banz wrote:
>
> On Jan 8, 2009, at 4:46 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 08:01:04AM -0800, Vincent Fox wrote:
>>> (Summary of filesystem discussion)
>>>
>>> You left out ZFS.
>>>
>>> Sometimes Linux admins remind me of Windows ad
On Jan 8, 2009, at 4:46 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 08:01:04AM -0800, Vincent Fox wrote:
>> (Summary of filesystem discussion)
>>
>> You left out ZFS.
>>
>> Sometimes Linux admins remind me of Windows admins.
>>
>> I have adminned a half-dozen UNIX variants professionally b
On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 20:03 -0500, "Dale Ghent" wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2009, at 7:46 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
> > We run one zfs machine. I've seen it report issues on a scrub
> > only to not have them on the second scrub. While it looks shiny
> > and great, it's also relatively new.
>
> Wait, we
On Jan 8, 2009, at 7:46 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> We run one zfs machine. I've seen it report issues on a scrub
> only to not have them on the second scrub. While it looks shiny
> and great, it's also relatively new.
Wait, weren't you just crowing about ext4? The filesystem that was
marked G
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 08:01:04AM -0800, Vincent Fox wrote:
> (Summary of filesystem discussion)
>
> You left out ZFS.
>
> Sometimes Linux admins remind me of Windows admins.
>
> I have adminned a half-dozen UNIX variants professionally but
> keep running into admins who only do ONE and for who
On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 05:20:00PM +0200, Janne Peltonen wrote:
> If I'm still following after reading through all this discussion,
> everyone who is actually using ReiserFS (v3) appears to be very content
> with it, even with very large installations. Apparently the fact that
> ReiserFS uses the B
On 02 Jan 2009, at 11:19, Lars Hanke wrote:
> hermod: /var/log/auth.log
> Jan 2 17:07:54 hermod imtest: GSSAPI Error: Unspecified GSS
> failure. Minor code may provide more information (Decrypt
> integrity check failed)
>
> hel: /var/log/syslog
> Jan 2 16:07:54 hel krb5kdc[1652]: TGS_REQ (7
(Summary of filesystem discussion)
You left out ZFS.
Sometimes Linux admins remind me of Windows admins.
I have adminned a half-dozen UNIX variants professionally but
keep running into admins who only do ONE and for whom every
problem is solved with "how can I do this with one OS only?"
I admin
On 08 Jan 09, at 1508, Blake Hudson wrote:
> Original Message
> Subject: Storage Sizing: IOPS per mailbox
> From: ram
> To: info-cyrus
> Date: Friday, January 02, 2009 10:40:17 PM
>> When sizing a storage device for a large cyrus server, the typical
>> question asked by stora
Hm.
ReiserFS:
If I'm still following after reading through all this discussion,
everyone who is actually using ReiserFS (v3) appears to be very content
with it, even with very large installations. Apparently the fact that
ReiserFS uses the BKL in places doesn't hurt performance too badly, even
wi
Original Message
Subject: Storage Sizing: IOPS per mailbox
From: ram
To: info-cyrus
Date: Friday, January 02, 2009 10:40:17 PM
> When sizing a storage device for a large cyrus server, the typical
> question asked by storage vendors is what is the IOPS required per
> mailbox
>
Lars Hanke wrote:
> BTW: It's still not working. I put it to PRI2, since the important
> ldapdb stuff is running. Kerberized imap is rarely used here, so people
> can do without. But still I'd like to understand, what is happening.
Is the keytab readable by the cyrus user (the Unix uid)?
Thank
16 matches
Mail list logo
