Re: The future of SIS
On 16.10.23 13:17, Pedro Ribeiro via dovecot wrote: Hello to everyone! Ooops, we are using SIS, guess the solution for a similar optimization will be a native deduplicated filesystem. A block level de-duplicating filesystem can only deduplicate data that is aligned to block boundaries. E-mail attachments tend to move around in to a different alignment in each copy stored into a different mailbox. Unless the storage format is designed to split off the attachments into files there is not much to be gained by block level dedup. So for the foreseeable future I'll have to stay off Dovecot 3.x or add four to five times more storage to both my IMAP servers since my users love to send big documents to multiple recipients. Is this an attempt to figuring out the pain tolerance of existing users before they fork the project or pay up the Danegeld? ___ dovecot mailing list -- dovecot@dovecot.org To unsubscribe send an email to dovecot-le...@dovecot.org
Re: The end of Dovecot Director?
On 27.10.22 04:24, Timo Sirainen wrote: Director never worked especially well, and for most use cases it's just unnecessarily complex. I think usually it could be replaced with: * Database (sql/ldap/whatever) containing user -> backend table. * Configure Dovecot proxy to use this database as passdb. * For HA change dovemon to update the database if backend is down to move users elsewhere * When backend comes up, move users into it. Set delay_until extra field for user in passdb to 5 seconds into future and kick the user in its old backend (e.g. via doveadm HTTP API). All this can be done with existing Dovecot. Should be much easier to build a project doing this than forking director. Thank you for putting what is about to be lost to the community edition into an operational perspectiv: no reason to panic. Nobody is taking replicated active-passive pairs from small to medium scale operators. Neither are the hooks required for more fancy load balancing and steering on the chopping block.
Re: Apple Mail behaviour: can not create sub-folders
On 01.03.22 02:18, Joseph Tam wrote: One of my Apple Mail users recently complained his mail reader couldn't create sub-folders -- he could only create top-level folders. Playing around with this, I discovered that I could create folders ( as opposed to mialboxes) *if* I specified mailbox name with a trailing slash. Has anyone come across this? Is this related to https://doc.dovecot.org/configuration_manual/mail_location/mbox/mboxchildfolders/ ? Joseph Tam Which path separators did were used?
Re: FTS-lucene errors : language not available for stemming
On 19.05.20 15:15, David Gessel wrote:
I'm getting some log errors with clucene that I am having no luck
tracking down on the interwebs.
Errors:
May 19 05:05:16
indexer-worker(ges...@blackrosetech.com)<62971>:
Error: lucene index /mail/blackrosetech.com/gessel//lucene-indexes:
IndexWriter::addDocument() failed (#4): language not available for
stemming
May 19 05:05:16 indexer-worker: Error:
May 19 05:05:16
indexer-worker(ges...@blackrosetech.com)<62971>:
Error: Mailbox Security: Mail search failed: Internal error occurred.
Refer to server log for more information. [2020-05-19 05:05:16]
May 19 05:05:16
indexer-worker(ges...@blackrosetech.com)<62971>:
Error: Mailbox Security: Transaction commit failed: FTS transaction
commit failed: transaction context (attempted to index 1 messages
(UIDs 152736..152736))
Config:
FreeBSD 11.3-RELEASE-p8 #0 r360490
dovecot-2.3.10_3
clucene-2.3.3.4_19
py37-pystemmer-2.0.0.1
py37-snowballstemmer-1.2.1
icu-67.1,1
plugin {
#setting_name = value
expire = Trash
mail_log_events = delete undelete expunge copy mailbox_delete
mailbox_rename
mail_log_fields = uid box msgid size
fts_autoindex=yes
#zlib_save_level = 6 # 1..9
#zlib_save = gz # or bz2
}
plugin {
fts = lucene
# Lucene-specific settings, good ones are:
fts_lucene = whitespace_chars=@. mime_parts
}
I am considering switch to xapian (solr and java... pls noe) as the
port is quite tempting from an ease of integration perspective, but
the easiest solution would be to resolve these odd indexing errors.
Anyone have a clue?
I ran into the same problem a few weeks back. The workaround I found was
to add no_snowball to fts_lucene. It disables the snowball algorithm.
Re: High availability of Dovecot
While possible it probably overkill. A simple failover proxy is enough unless he requires a active-active setup. On 11.04.19 11:54, Aki Tuomi via dovecot wrote: > > On 11.4.2019 11.44, luckydog xf via dovecot wrote: >> Hi, list, >> >> I'm going to deploy postfix + dovecot + CephFS( as Mail Storage). >> Basically I want to use two servers for them, which is kind of HA. >> >> My idea is that using keepalived or Pacemaker to host a VIP, which >> could fail over the other server once one is down. And I'll use >> Haproxy or Nginx to schedule connections to one of those server based >> on source IP( Session stickiness), I'll use VIP as DNS record.etc, is >> my plan doable? >> >> I know MX could be server ones with different priority. But I think >> it brings along shortage that DNS couldn't know Email server is up or >> down, it just returns results to MUA, right? >> >> Thanks for any suggestions and ideas. >> >> - > > You could use dovecot configured as director in the front, it would > assign users to backends and maintain that to avoid accessing same users > on two backends. > > Aki >
