It not be because Timo not agree with thiz for switching, if one software
not do what you need, you go look for one that does as other says, my
manager would command that, I expect you manager also command you same.
I have mail from list member who advize me of broken 1.2 version where
thiz work
+1
On 5/30/13, Edwardo Garcia wdgar...@gmail.com wrote:
As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz
dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use
two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too!
On Wed, May 29,
On 5/30/13, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote:
Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz
dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to
use
two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this
Am 30.05.2013 05:42, schrieb Robert Schetterer:
Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz
dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use
two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this
On 2013-05-30 2:59 AM, Nick Edwards nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com wrote:
nobody makes us dovecot true, but dovecot works fine and in perfect
harmony with postfix, except this one option. I remember the earlier
thread and have been waiting for this option, but now I see Timo has
decided to drop the
Am 30.05.2013 12:54, schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 30.05.2013 05:42, schrieb Robert Schetterer:
Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz
dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use
two
On 2013-05-30 9:10 AM, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote:
Hi Harald, if you declare this broken, why not fix it yourself, instead
of barking to the moon, however the current behave should be written in
the wiki, to avoid recover the same questions on the list in periods
Well, I'd add that
Am 30.05.2013 15:17, schrieb Charles Marcus:
On 2013-05-30 9:10 AM, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote:
Hi Harald, if you declare this broken, why not fix it yourself, instead
of barking to the moon, however the current behave should be written in
the wiki, to avoid recover the same
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 20:24 +0200, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Well, I'd add that the config itself should complain (with a link to the
wiki page explaining the issue) if more than one server is added. In
other words, it should tell the admin that it will not work as they may
be expecting.
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 07:01 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2013-05-30 2:59 AM, Nick Edwards nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com wrote:
nobody makes us dovecot true, but dovecot works fine and in perfect
harmony with postfix, except this one option. I remember the earlier
thread and have been
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 15:10 +0200, Robert Schetterer wrote:
Hi Harald, if you declare this broken, why not fix it yourself, instead
of barking to the moon, however the current behave should be written in
the wiki, to avoid recover the same questions on the list in periods
Question Robert,
Respectfully, I would disagree, if dovecot offers the capability to use
two host='s then you should be able to configure the order, remember,
earlier dovecot did this but you claimed it was broken shouldnt have and
fixed it, which is why not only myself but another at the time suggested
when you
so better remove the option to specify more than one host
instead let people run over years in troubles until they
find out that a logical behavior like for postfix is not
given for dovecot's mysql-connections - yes i was one of
the who thought hey both works the same way until
i realized that
As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz
dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use
two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too!
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.netwrote:
so
Am 30.05.2013 03:41, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
As oringanal poster, I agree with previouz comment, I too feel thiz
dovecot responsibile for thiz work handoff, or should delete ability to use
two host, people twitter I ask all along thought this how it work too!
where is the problem, nobody
But each additional link added to the chain, is one more point of
failure, unless he's replied to OP privately I'm amazed Timo has ignored
this, since its been brought up from time to time before, if he no
longer plans on doing it, he should just say so, so people can look at
complete
I haven't replied to most of the threads recently. Anyway, after thinking about
this, I'm thinking this kind of connection fallback handling isn't really
Dovecot's job. A load balancer could be configured to do it just as well
(whereas LB couldn't do actual load balancing for multiple sql
Edwardo Garcia wrote:
Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all.
For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network.
You might try to put mysqlproxy in between dovecot and your mysql cluster
and have dovecot connect to the failover proxy (or proxies) instead of
connecting the
Hi,
Balls, the silly script (written in largely incomprehensible perl by a
predecessor of mine) is supposed to catch mailing lists, and HR won't
let us have it auto-terminate or update... :-(
Thanks for giving me an another few hours work :-)
Alex
On 24/05/13 08:54, Edwardo Garcia wrote:
Halo,
(First time posting, please forgive English is not native)
Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16
Having two server.
Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave.
What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql not
work when then ask master, we have
On 24/05/13 08:45, Edwardo Garcia wrote:
Halo,
(First time posting, please forgive English is not native)
Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16
Having two server.
Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave.
What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless slave mysql
But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to
talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Alex Crow ac...@integrafin.co.uk wrote:
On 24/05/13 08:45, Edwardo Garcia wrote:
Halo,
(First time posting, please forgive
Am 24.05.2013 09:45, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
Halo,
(First time posting, please forgive English is not native)
Change from Courier to Dovecot 2.1.16
Having two server.
Having mysql on thiz two server, one master, one slave.
What we wish is slave Dovecot only ask slave mysql, unless
Am 24.05.2013 09:52, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to
talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die
and this mostly for a good resason to support your argument
if you configure localhost and the slave in postfix you
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 10:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 24.05.2013 09:52, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both, do not want Dovecot to
talk to both at same time unless slave (local) copy die
and this mostly for a good resason to support your
Halo Robert,
Yes indeed, so it seem it does not do at all.
Timo or other developer? Are you still plan introduce option? If so, may
ask what version?
For now we disable use two hosts, but thiz not optimum for network.
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote:
Yes, thiz why the slave be localhost on same machine work many time faster,
backup host set for master database server as last resort fallover since
network traffic bottleneck
Hope Timo comment on option, so far he ignore thread, so maybe no plan now.
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Reindl
What version broken where thiz work like need? Maybe I try.
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Noel Butler noel.but...@ausics.net wrote:
On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 10:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 24.05.2013 09:52, schrieb Edwardo Garcia:
But mysql not problemo, it be Dovecot talk to both,
28 matches
Mail list logo
