On 26.08.2013, at 22:20, Michael Grimm wrote:
> Three mdbox files became deleted and copied to w ones.
s/to w ones/to new ones/
Sorry.
On 26.08.2013, at 21:59, Javier de Miguel RodrÃguez
wrote:
> If you have hundreds of messages in a mdbox and you doveadm purge one of
> them, the full .m file must be copied in the incremental / diferential
> backup.
Good point! I won't suffer from that, but those with thousands of users will
Another intesting thing for this thread: if you set a very high
value for mdbox rotate settings, your incremental backups will be awful.
If you have hundreds of messages in a mdbox and you doveadm purge one of
them, the full .m file must be copied in the incremental / diferential
backup.
I use
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:31:20PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> >On 2013-08-26 2:58 PM, Michael Grimm wrote:
> >>As a very rough estimate I do estimate a 5% waste of space
> >>regarding deleted messages. But, my handful users are very
> >>disciplined in purging their deleted messages on a regula
On 26.08.2013, at 21:23, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2013-08-26 2:58 PM, Michael Grimm wrote:
>> As a very rough estimate I do estimate a 5% waste of space regarding deleted
>> messages. But, my handful users are very disciplined in purging their
>> deleted messages on a regular basis (I told t
On 2013-08-26 3:23 PM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2013-08-26 2:58 PM, Michael Grimm wrote:
As a very rough estimate I do estimate a 5% waste of space regarding
deleted messages. But, my handful users are very disciplined in
purging their deleted messages on a regular basis (I told them to
do),
On 2013-08-26 2:58 PM, Michael Grimm wrote:
As a very rough estimate I do estimate a 5% waste of space regarding deleted messages.
But, my handful users are very disciplined in purging their deleted messages on a regular
basis (I told them to do), and thus my regular "doveadm purge -A" runs wi
On 2013-08-26 3:05 PM, Michael Grimm wrote:
On 26.08.2013, at 20:35, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2013-08-24 4:47 AM, Michael Grimm wrote:
Don't ask me why I did chose 100m, I cannot remember;-) Ok, if one of such
mdbox files will become corrupt, I will loose a lot of mail, but on the other
h
On 26.08.2013, at 20:35, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2013-08-24 4:47 AM, Michael Grimm wrote:
>> Don't ask me why I did chose 100m, I cannot remember;-) Ok, if one of such
>> mdbox files will become corrupt, I will loose a lot of mail, but on the
>> other hand I am running two dovecot servers
On 25.08.2013, at 15:37, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 10:47:56AM +0200, Michael Grimm wrote:
>> I am running "mdbox_rotate_size = 100m" for approx. a year now on
>> a small server (a handful of users, only). All mailboxes are around
>> 1G each with a lot of attachments. I
On 2013-08-24 4:47 AM, Michael Grimm wrote:
Don't ask me why I did chose 100m, I cannot remember;-) Ok, if one of such
mdbox files will become corrupt, I will loose a lot of mail, but on the other
hand I am running two dovecot servers in parallel (replicator/dsync) and I do
take hourly snaps
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 10:47:56AM +0200, Michael Grimm wrote:
>
> I am running "mdbox_rotate_size = 100m" for approx. a year now on
> a small server (a handful of users, only). All mailboxes are around
> 1G each with a lot of attachments. I never had an issue so far.
How much space are your mdbo
On 23.08.2013, at 14:17, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2013-08-22 9:57 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> I'd recommend mdbox as well, with a healthy rotation size. The larger
>> files won't increase IMAP performance substantially but they can make
>> backup significantly quicker.
>
> I'm considering mi
On 8/23/2013 7:17 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2013-08-22 9:57 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> On 8/21/2013 4:07 PM, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote:
>>
>>> I would strongly suggest using mdbox instead. AFAIK clusterfs' aren't
>> I'd recommend mdbox as well, with a healthy rotation size. The larger
>> fi
On 2013-08-22 9:57 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 8/21/2013 4:07 PM, Jan-Frode Myklebust wrote:
I would strongly suggest using mdbox instead. AFAIK clusterfs' aren't
I'd recommend mdbox as well, with a healthy rotation size. The larger
files won't increase IMAP performance substantially but the
15 matches
Mail list logo
