Re: limit tcp sessions opened by an IMAP client

2009-04-15 Thread LALOT Dominique
Outlook 2007 has won the price.. It's a pity there is no options like, for a given address, no more than 5 simultaneous connexions Dom 2009/4/14 Joseph Brennan bren...@columbia.edu LALOT Dominique dom.la...@gmail.com wrote: . I've seen once entourage on macosx ignoring 5xx code from our

Re: restore seen file

2009-04-15 Thread Mathieu Kretchner
No answer ! So could I say that there is no possibility to restore an old seen file for an user ? thanks for your help Mathieu Kretchner a écrit : Hello, Is it possible to restore seen file even if the mailbox has changed ? If yes how ? thanks Cyrus Home Page:

Re: restore seen file

2009-04-15 Thread Eric Luyten
On Wed, April 15, 2009 2:56 pm, Mathieu Kretchner wrote: No answer ! So could I say that there is no possibility to restore an old seen file for an user ? Hm... I'd be inclined to think you might get away with it if and when you have also restored the original cyrus.header and/or

Question about upgrading and mismatched backends

2009-04-15 Thread Tim Champ
Hello all. My first time to post, I only recently joined the list. I'm digging in deeply on an inherited cyrus install, and looking to upgrade. My goal is to put a new backend server in place for our setup. Our basic setup is 3 front-ends, 4 back-ends and a mupdate server. I'm looking to

Re: Question about upgrading and mismatched backends

2009-04-15 Thread Dave McMurtrie
Tim Champ wrote: Hello all. My first time to post, I only recently joined the list. I'm digging in deeply on an inherited cyrus install, and looking to upgrade. My goal is to put a new backend server in place for our setup. Our basic setup is 3 front-ends, 4 back-ends and a mupdate

Re: Question about upgrading and mismatched backends

2009-04-15 Thread Tim Champ
Dave McMurtrie wrote: Tim Champ wrote: Hello all. My first time to post, I only recently joined the list. I'm digging in deeply on an inherited cyrus install, and looking to upgrade. My goal is to put a new backend server in place for our setup. Our basic setup is 3 front-ends, 4

Re: Question about upgrading and mismatched backends

2009-04-15 Thread Bron Gondwana
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 09:43:26AM -0400, Tim Champ wrote: Dave McMurtrie wrote: Tim Champ wrote: Hello all. My first time to post, I only recently joined the list. I'm digging in deeply on an inherited cyrus install, and looking to upgrade. My goal is to put a new backend

Message contains NUL characters - howto dump?

2009-04-15 Thread Klemens Puritscher
Hello, I have a problem with one of our customers. When he forwards an email with the thunderbird email client (windows version), the lmtp-daemon on my cyrus-imapd (v2.3.13) rejects those emails with the error 554 5.6.0 Message contains NUL characters. ...ok, that's clear, there are NUL

Re: Does Cyrus benefit greatly from increased FS buffer cache?

2009-04-15 Thread Blake Hudson
We're able to utilize ~ 4GB of cache on a 32bit installation of Cyrus/Postfix (we're using ext3 - dunno if it has a different cache limitation compared to reiser). This installation serves ~15k mailboxes and has between 250 and 500 active POP/IMAP sessions at any given time. Unfortunately, we

Re: restore seen file

2009-04-15 Thread Andreas Winkelmann
Am Mittwoch 15 April 2009 14:56:32 schrieb Mathieu Kretchner: No answer ! So could I say that there is no possibility to restore an old seen file for an user ? What means old? What has changed? Each Mailbox has a unique number which is in the seen-File and each Message has a unique number

Re: Does Cyrus benefit greatly from increased FS buffer cache?

2009-04-15 Thread Andrew Morgan
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, John Widera wrote: Hi, Last week we posted to the list for info about running Cyrus on 64-bit RHEL. But we also needed to ask a more direct question about caching, though, and didn't. So we are now... That q. is, does Cyrus actually benefit from large amounts of

Re: Does Cyrus benefit greatly from increased FS buffer cache?

2009-04-15 Thread Rob Mueller
Our plan is to throw 12-16GB at it, with the purpose of vastly increasing the FS buffer cache (and decreasing I/O). Or, will that just be a waste of RAM? Some indications are that, yes, it does improve performance notably: