Re: [Dovecot] dovecot produces messages dupes after nfs problems
On 2014-01-22 2:37 PM, Patrick Westenberg p...@wk-serv.de wrote: All duplicates have no received from headers. Seperate lmtp log shows only one delivery. As when troubleshooting anything like this, FULL logs for an event exhibiting the problem is in order. So, a full transaction log of a delivery that resulted in duplicates. Not just the LMTP logs, ALL logs (including the postfix logs). Any hint or advice what might be wrong? Since you are using NFS, and there are well known potential issues when using NFS under certain circumstances, a more detailed description of your (NFS) setup is in order. Ie - are you using Director? -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] Problem with LDA. When vacation auto-reply sent, the field from=.
Now you could filter using header_checks (http://www.postfix.org/header_checks.5.html) /From: .*@domain1/ FILTER transport1:[1.1.1.1] Big thanks for idea! I don't really like it, but I have not found anything better... I made 10025 inet n - n - - smtpd -o cleanup_service_name=clup_ar clup_ar unix n - n - 0 cleanup -o header_checks=regexp:/etc/postfix/header_checks in postfix for auto-reply submission_host = 10.10.10.10:10025 in dovecot and this really work Best Regards Dmitry
Re: [Dovecot] Architecture for large Dovecot cluster (employ an expert!)
Hi and some other Dovecot mailing list threads but I am not sure how many users such a setup will handle. I have a concern about the I/O performance of NFS in the suggested architecture above. One possible option available to us is to split up the mailboxes over multiple clusters with subsets of domains. Is there anyone out there currently running this many users on a Dovecot based mail cluster? Some suggestions or advice on the best way to go would be greatly appreciated. look about list archive for equal setups , ask Timo or other people for paid support, wait for people reporting their big setups It's difficult for me (on the outside) to gauge how many people do pay Timo, et al for services. However, just to put a stake in the ground, I have employed Timo on a couple of occasions, just for small projects, but in my case to add new features or fix bugs which are specific to my requirements. I will very positively recommend this, I found Timo extremely helpful and although I only paid an affordable amount to have a feature added, he has kindly continued to maintain these features as part of the core software (for which I am extremely grateful) I'm very satisfied and have to highly recommend Timo. His prices were extremely reasonable and he offered service excellent. This is obviously a glowing endorsement, take that as you wish. However, I suspect that sometimes we are all guilty of forgetting that there are humans on the far side of these projects and for relatively affordable sums we can employ them to both help us out (and possibly benefit all users of the software). I don't have big pockets, but I have successfully asked for enhancements to several open source projects (dovecot/dnsmasq/shorewall/squid and some others) and the whole experience has worked very well for me. Please feel encouraged to employ Timo if you use Dovecot! Good luck Ed W
Re: [Dovecot] IMAP ANNOTATE Extension RFC5257
Hi And FWIW, that RFC is classified as Experimental. Hasn't been a bunch of momentum behind it, at least in terms of adoption/implementations. Mailbox metadata seems to be the more interesting development at this time (RFC 5464). michael Yes, I know, but for groupware collaboration on mails, it is an useful feature. Especially in companies, where an extreme group based workflow is used. Is this the extension necessary to make Kolab work correctly? I would be interested to see further implementation on that? I think Kolab has the most legs at the moment for me to use to extend our services with extra groupware features (I think I would prefer to implement filesystem based storage of DAV files, but apart from that it looks good and seems to be heading in the right direction) Anyone want to pitch in fund development in this area? Cheers Ed W
Re: [Dovecot] Architecture for large Dovecot cluster (employ an expert!)
On 2014-01-23 11:57 AM, Ed W li...@wildgooses.com wrote: I'm very satisfied and have to highly recommend Timo. His prices were extremely reasonable and he offered service excellent. ...snip... Please feel encouraged to employ Timo if you use Dovecot! I will add a hearty 'seconded!' to this endorsement. Timo helped migrate our old courier-imap setup and dis so quickly and efficiently. A few legacy config issues prevented us from switching to the dovecot LDA at the time, but he explained in detail what I needed to do, and when I migrated our old bare metal gentoo mail server to a shiny new virtualized one, I made the changes and everything just worked (with a few minor issues I had to fix, also related to the same legacy config issues)... I just wish my boss was more open to spending money on technology so I could engage Timo to do a few more things... -- Best regards, Charles
Re: [Dovecot] IMAP ANNOTATE Extension RFC5257
Quoting Ed W li...@wildgooses.com: Hi And FWIW, that RFC is classified as Experimental. Hasn't been a bunch of momentum behind it, at least in terms of adoption/implementations. Mailbox metadata seems to be the more interesting development at this time (RFC 5464). michael Yes, I know, but for groupware collaboration on mails, it is an useful feature. Especially in companies, where an extreme group based workflow is used. Is this the extension necessary to make Kolab work correctly? IIRC, No. Kolab uses the mailbox-level METADATA extension instead (RFC 5464). michael
Re: [Dovecot] IMAP ANNOTATE Extension RFC5257
On 01/23/2014 07:11 PM, Michael M Slusarz wrote: IIRC, No. Kolab uses the mailbox-level METADATA extension instead (RFC 5464). RFC5257 is for message annotations (not folder/mailbox annotations), so it is a different thing. Kolab does not use it. Anyway there are not many servers supporting RFC5257. -- Aleksander 'A.L.E.C' Machniak LAN Management System Developer [http://lms.org.pl] Roundcube Webmail Developer [http://roundcube.net] --- PGP: 19359DC1 @@ GG: 2275252 @@ WWW: http://alec.pl
[Dovecot] questions about SETQUOTA
hi, i tried to setup my configuration to use the SETQUOTA command but the only thing i got is: 3 setquota User quota (storage 12345) 3 OK Setquota completed. but nothing is changed in database. i modified the password_query and the user_query to return the admin and userdb_admin field, both set to y. all other changes that are done are like in the wiki http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Quota/Configuration enabling debug doesn't show anything in debug.log
Re: [Dovecot] Writing an FTS plugin
On Sat, Jan 04, 2014 at 03:03:25PM -0500, John Morrissey wrote:
Hi, I'm having some trouble writing an FTS plugin that uses notmuch
(http://notmuchmail.org/) as the backend.
As a proof of concept, I'm adding a hardcoded UID to the search results in
the plugin's lookup handler:
seq_range_array_add(result-definite_uids, 1, 42);
but this UID is never returned by IMAP SEARCH commands. I know the plugin is
being used, since I'm also syslogging immediately before the call to
seq_range_array_add().
Interestingly, SEARCH commands return correct results (based on the mailbox
content and the search terms specified), but I'm not sure where those
results are coming from. The notmuch plugin is the only configured FTS
plugin:
mail_plugins = $mail_plugins fts fts_notmuch
plugin {
fts = notmuch
}
What might I be doing wrong?
Additionally, notmuch returns message filenames, which I'll need to
translate to UIDs. I've seen maildir_uidlist_get_uid(), but I'm not sure
where to get the struct maildir_uidlist arg it needs. notmuch only supports
the Maildir format, so using a maildir_* function seems a reasonably safe
assumption, but is there a better way?
I haven't made much progress on this, and I'd love if someone knowledgeable
about this part of the code base could point me in the right direction.
I'm obv. more than happy to submit the final plugin, but I need a hand
getting past this.
john
--
John Morrissey _o/\ __o
j...@horde.net_- \_ / \ \,
www.horde.net/__(_)/_(_)/\___(_) /_(_)__
[Dovecot] doveadm stats top exit with error
Hello, looks like a cosmetical problem but I like to mention it though: doveadm stats top is interactive. To exit I press as usual CTRL+C and get ^Cdoveadm(root): Error: close(-1[doveadm-stats.c:496]) failed: Interrupted system call It's dovecot-2.2.10. Andreas
Re: [Dovecot] dovecot produces messages dupes after nfs problems
On 1/23/14, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote: On 2014-01-22 2:37 PM, Patrick Westenberg p...@wk-serv.de wrote: All duplicates have no received from headers. Seperate lmtp log shows only one delivery. As when troubleshooting anything like this, FULL logs for an event exhibiting the problem is in order. doubt that would work in this case Since you are using NFS, and there are well known potential issues when using NFS under certain circumstances, a more detailed description of your (NFS) setup is in order. never had any probems with NFS, but we dont use lmtp, we use dovecot-lda and we dont use director either
Re: [Dovecot] questions about SETQUOTA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 23 Jan 2014, Michael Cramer wrote: i tried to setup my configuration to use the SETQUOTA command but the only thing i got is: 3 setquota User quota (storage 12345) 3 OK Setquota completed. but nothing is changed in database. i modified the password_query and the user_query to return the admin and userdb_admin field, both set to y. all other changes that are done are like in the wiki http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Quota/Configuration Please post your doveconf -n - -- Steffen Kaiser -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUBUuIZ1nD1/YhP6VMHAQKVCwgAgS9VVyagJLyw/1EPb/IqpQDOx20yVnzM nX9mu0mvVpuMrCS22VXsEssMQhD2xJ7X+0fL/3eeajXHUdcbAFwTnupndf37U90y qdi0OGzorbgzltUYDXhPx1wwTPRUs62t4PB3Nbhca/zgT5JeH0Jy2L6q9+CXsYlV l/rA111qGNptxjjtsPACbuquctXJ1bFf3IKKmLn2GbJCruZEbFm47m3YctN3FewC tHaTP+3j9oVu+vKlFxTo7NL60lkxPfDzi4B2fPXI3eUvP/BTrAcwgVMbvMJp0DyT U6Mb4il1ReSsgOdqa6iwp9vff1R+FoYMUz4E6wuR7f08pGMu8n8UIw== =xlbQ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
