RE: controlling STARTTLS by IP address

Quoting Michael Fox : > > Seems like your firewall could redirect to a different port that doesn't > > offer starttls. > > Yes, of course. But that would require multiple ports, making the client > configuration cumbersome and error-prone. It looks like there's an internal

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

Quoting Ruga : > Comparison of Dovecot, Uwash, Courier, Cyrus and M-Box: > http://www.isode.com/whitepapers/mbox-benchmark.html Wow. That comparison is only 11.5 years old. The "default" file system of reiserfs and gcc-3.3 were dead giveaways. I suspect Dovecot's changed

Re: Minor patches for builds against ancient platforms

> >> Warning: Transaction log file > /home/luser/mail/.imap/INBOX/dovecot.index.log > >> was locked for 95 seconds (rotating while syncing) > > Timo recently explained to me it's probably caused by slow I/O or > processing. This explanation is consistent with my observation that > the users who

Minor patches for builds against ancient platforms

I was recently asked to upgrade some neolithic aged software (UW-IMAP, sendmail 8.12.x, apache 1.3, amongst other horrors). The box is physically remote, so an aggressive "new flush" wasn't an option. I've been able to upgrade the compiler to gcc-3.4, openssl to 1.0.2k, glibc, php to something

Re: Minor patches for builds against ancient platforms

Timo Sirainen inscribed: Have you set mbox_very_dirty_syncs=yes? That should be helpful. Oh, that sounded like a risky option. I do have mbox_dirty_syncs enabled. Are there still "safety checks" with the extra down-and-dirty sync option? Joseph Tam-a-lyne wrote: > doveadm user $user > >

Re: Minor patches for builds against ancient platforms

I've gone through and recompiled sendmail (enabling HASFLOCK) and procmail (disabling lockf()) to harmonise the locking strategies, as it seems various authors of email software over the years have pontificated with great force and wind about which locking strategy was truly FUBARed and which was

Re: Minor patches for builds against ancient platforms

Quoting Joseph Tam : > If this is output on the dovecot server itself so there's no mismatch > in pathnames. Have you checked whether the dovecot user can traverse > all the way from / to /u2/usermail/luser/ The dovecot user, as in the "dummy" user dovecot uses for

Re: Minor patches for builds against ancient platforms

surprised by the pickiness of the group ownership/permissions issues, though reflecting on things, I can see why you'd at least want some logging by default for those conditions. His Timoness boomed: > On 9 Jun 2017, at 5.03, M. Balridge <dove...@r.paypc.com> wrote: >> 1) In src/

Re: Retrieving mail from read-only mdbox

Quoting Mark Moseley : > I've tried using IMAP with mail_location pointed at the snapshot, but, > though I can get a listing of emails in the mailbox, the fetch fails when > dovecot can't write-lock dovecot.index.log. I'm surprised that dovecot would even try to write-lock

Re: [trees-plugin] - Dovecot index gets corrupted, when using maildir and recievend and accessing mail at the same time

Quoting Joseph Tam : > Another privacy plugin that assumes the server operator is unmotivated or > respects your privacy anyways, and won't just skim your password right off > the top to look at your mail. A vault with steel walls and a dirt floor. *SIGH* As usual, you're right on the money,

Re: Storing Messages in the cloud

Quoting Dave McGuire : > On 07/10/2018 09:23 AM, dcl...@list.jmatt.net wrote: > >> A colleague asked me if it was possible for Dovecot to store messages > >> in the cloud. > > > > Does he have a more specific description of what he wants than "in the > > cloud", or does he just like using

Re: Solr

> The main problem is : After some time of indexing from Dovecot, Dovecot > returns errors (invalid SID, etc...) and Solr return "out of range > indexes" errors I've been watching the progress of this thread with no small concern, mainly because I've been tasked with providing a server-side

Re: Mailing list address harvested for spamming

Quoting dovecot-...@deemzed.uk: > Not to stir the pot, but I notice my email address has recently been > harvested from this list for spamming purposes. This email address is > unique and not used for anything else. > > I'd distinguish this from spam sent to the mailing list itself, which is >

Re: Solr connection timeout hardwired to 60s

> I'm a denizen of the solr-u...@lucene.apache.org mailing list. > [...] > Here's a wiki page that I wrote about that topic. This wiki is going > away next month, but for now you can still access it: > > https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceProblems That's a great resource, Shawn. I