On 2007-09-20, at 1236, mlist wrote:
Now when I try to delete a user I get a segfault:
mail:/home/vpopmail/bin # vdeluser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Segmentation fault
first, why would you want to delete a domain's postmaster mailbox?
second, i would have thought the vdeluser command, or the
John Simpson wrote:
On 2007-09-20, at 1236, mlist wrote:
Now when I try to delete a user I get a segfault:
mail:/home/vpopmail/bin # vdeluser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Segmentation fault
first, why would you want to delete a domain's postmaster mailbox?
second, i would have thought the
On Sep 20, 2007, at 12:56 PM, Rick Widmer wrote:
If I remember right, speed was the reason for separate tables, but
testing showed it was not faster. I think the single table works
better because all your mail users are accessing the same table,
and its indexes so they stay loaded all the
Is there any movement to fix 5.4.22 to co-habitate with Qmailadmin ? I'm
not in any hurry to try and upgrade again BUT I really like running the
latest version if possible ;)
Tom Collins wrote:
On Sep 20, 2007, at 12:56 PM, Rick Widmer wrote:
If I remember right, speed was the reason for separate tables, but
testing showed it was not faster. I think the single table works
better because all your mail users are accessing the same table, and
its indexes so they
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Robin Bowes wrote:
Tom Collins wrote:
I understand what you're proposing, but I would suggest that it would
add complexity for little gain. Of course, that would need benchmarking
to establish which is the faster method.
If someone can give me a large dataset, I'm
Robin Bowes wrote:
Tom Collins wrote:
I understand what you're proposing, but I would suggest that it would
add complexity for little gain. Of course, that would need benchmarking
to establish which is the faster method.
If someone can give me a large dataset, I'm happy to crunch some numbers.
Robin Bowes wrote:
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Robin Bowes wrote:
Tom Collins wrote:
I understand what you're proposing, but I would suggest that it would
add complexity for little gain. Of course, that would need benchmarking
to establish which is the faster method.
If someone can give me a
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Robin Bowes wrote:
What sort of size of database are folk using in the real world? How many
users?
What's the most common no. of users?
R.
I'm guessing 200 - 2000 but that's based on the servers I manage for
clients (around 20 or so).
The biggest installation
Robin Bowes wrote:
Without looking at the RFC, I seem to recall is says that you must
accept mail for [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's not the same as having a
vpopmail user named postmaster for the example.com domain.
However, it seems to me to be pretty perverse to delete the
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok great...I'll wait for the official release and test that, thanks for all
your work on this.
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:33:05 -0600, Rick Widmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Allie Daneman wrote:
Is there any movement to fix 5.4.22 to co-habitate with Qmailadmin ? I'm
not in any hurry to try and
On Sep 21, 2007, at 3:33 PM, Rick Widmer wrote:
There is a patch for qmailadmin on SourceForge. Its tracker number
is [1795973]. On the other hand, this weekend I will release
5.4.23 that backs out the change that caused this problem. I want
a stable release that does not require any
I wasn't quite ready for this, but it has been on my list for a long
time... since it has come up, let me throw up this database structure
for comment. I have reduced the number of tables (in a full
installation) and made it relational.-
CREATE TABLE Domains(
domain_id
On Sep 21, 2007, at 4:32 PM, Rick Widmer wrote:
Comments?
I think we'll get better domain alias support if you pull column
`domain` out of table `Domains` and add it to the table `domain_alias`.
Domain name to domain on the system is a many to one
relationship, so the name should be in a
14 matches
Mail list logo
