Re: ext3 / XFS [Was: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?]

We use ext4 for more than one year now. Efficient and stable. A good choise 12 spool of 250GB over 10 FC disks using metalun. Dom 2010/11/16 Robert Mueller > > > > This is depends on what filesystem you are useing, I have mailboxes > with hundreds > > > of thousands of messages in them on XFS a

move default domain mailboxes

After setting up murder, is it possible to move mailboxes that use the default domain from one backend server to another? The new back-end server has a different default domain. After which the default domain on the original backend server will be changed. before: server 1 default domain: domainA

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

Am 16.11.10 19:08, schrieb Wesley Craig: > On 16 Nov 2010, at 10:32, Joseph Brennan wrote: >> I wish we'd somehow financed a native Cyrus webmail interface, that is >> not using IMAP but built into Cyrus. I don't think users know how good >> Cyrus is because they look at it through a weak intermed

Re: ext3 / XFS

> > This is depends on what filesystem you are useing, I have mailboxes with > > hundreds > > of thousands of messages in them on XFS and have no problems, but on ext3 I > > start seeing slowdowns with a bit over ten thousand messages. > > Was dir_index enabled on that ext3 filesystem? Prior t

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> On 16 Nov 2010, at 10:32, Joseph Brennan wrote: > > I wish we'd somehow financed a native Cyrus webmail interface, that is > > not using IMAP but built into Cyrus. I don't think users know how good > > Cyrus is because they look at it through a weak intermediary. > > I don't think a Cyrus-speci

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> On 16.11.2010 17:11, Shuvam Misra wrote: > > I guess Webmail is OT on a Cyrus mailing list, but can't help asking: any > > suggestions for > > improving Webmail performance? (Admission: we haven't yet tried imapproxy > > -- it appears to be a good piece of C which will help things.) > > You sho

Re: ext3 / XFS [Was: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?]

> > This is depends on what filesystem you are useing, I have mailboxes with > > hundreds > > of thousands of messages in them on XFS and have no problems, but on ext3 I > > start seeing slowdowns with a bit over ten thousand messages. > > Was dir_index enabled on that ext3 filesystem? Prior

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 08:38:49AM -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 14:12 +0100, Rudy Gevaert wrote: > > On 11/16/2010 12:30 PM, Dave McMurtrie wrote: > > > Good morning, > > > This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there > > > anyone out there who al

Re: ext3 / XFS [Was: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 11:25 -0800, David Lang wrote: >>> I don't actually know what sort of problems I'm referring to, hence the >>> question. The big problem I can imagine would be opendir() and >>> readdir() with a huge number of files in a dire

ext3 / XFS [Was: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?]

On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 11:25 -0800, David Lang wrote: > > I don't actually know what sort of problems I'm referring to, hence the > > question. The big problem I can imagine would be opendir() and > > readdir() with a huge number of files in a directory, but the cyrus code > > doesn't appear to do

Re: sieve not filing messages?

On 16/11/10 10:33 -0600, Mike Eggleston wrote: >Morning, > >I have a user saying that email messages are not being filed as desired. I >have copied the user's script into Sieve Test > and the user's sieve rules. >Sieve Test says the message should

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Ciprian wrote: > Adam Tauno Williams wrote: >> I think the issue you will encounter first is clients will start to fall >> down when folders exceed a 'reasonable' number of messages. Common IMAP >> clients I've seen start to exhibit severe performance issues beyond a >> few h

Re: Fwd: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Dave McMurtrie wrote: > I didn't realize that I only responded to Rob here. Perhaps my > additional information will shed some light on the kind of information > I'm looking for. > > Original Message > Subject: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely la

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> Didn't Dave write up.imapproxy? It makes a huge difference for, e.g., > IMP & roundcube. Also, configuring client to not retrieve the LIST of > mailboxes during every transaction is a big win. Thanks a lot -- will definitely incorporate it into our setup. How does one configure the client not

sync_client IOERROR

I am seeing occasional messages of the form: Nov 16 13:01:36 imap-be4 sync_client[21977]: IOERROR: index record 0 for user. past end of file There are two messages from around the time of the error message that were not synchronized. But, these also appear to have been expunged by pop3. Mike

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On 16 Nov 2010, at 10:32, Joseph Brennan wrote: > I wish we'd somehow financed a native Cyrus webmail interface, that is > not using IMAP but built into Cyrus. I don't think users know how good > Cyrus is because they look at it through a weak intermediary. I don't think a Cyrus-specific web inte

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On 16.11.2010 17:11, Shuvam Misra wrote: > I guess Webmail is OT on a Cyrus mailing list, but can't help asking: any > suggestions for > improving Webmail performance? (Admission: we haven't yet tried imapproxy > -- it appears to be a good piece of C which will help things.) You should install im

sieve not filing messages?

Morning, I have a user saying that email messages are not being filed as desired. I have copied the user's script into Sieve Test and the user's sieve rules. Sieve Test says the message should go to where is expected, but the message isn't in t

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> > We find that Webmail chokes server performance much earlier than normal > > IMAP clients do. I know this has nothing to do with Cyrus, but I just > > thought I'd mention it. Most programming environments in which such > > Webmail thingies are written (mostly PHP on the server and nowadays > > l

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On 11/16/2010 10:36 AM, Wesley Craig wrote: > Didn't Dave write up.imapproxy? It makes a huge difference for, e.g., IMP& > roundcube. Also, configuring client to not retrieve the LIST of mailboxes > during every transaction is a big win. Coincidentally, yes I did originally write that :)

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

Didn't Dave write up.imapproxy? It makes a huge difference for, e.g., IMP & roundcube. Also, configuring client to not retrieve the LIST of mailboxes during every transaction is a big win. :wes On 16 Nov 2010, at 10:11, Shuvam Misra wrote: > Most programming environments in which such > Webm

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 08:41:46PM +0530, Shuvam Misra wrote: > > > I think the issue you will encounter first is clients will start to fall > > > down when folders exceed a 'reasonable' number of messages. Common IMAP > > > clients I've seen start to exhibit severe performance issues beyond a > >

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> We know things will be fine with 10,000 messages too, but > 100,000 msgs in a folder is pushing things. My inbox is 17,338 at the moment, and it's still fast. But I'm using an old copy of Mulberry, which was designed for IMAP. The problem area is clients designed for POP and adapted to IMAP.

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> > I think the issue you will encounter first is clients will start to fall > > down when folders exceed a 'reasonable' number of messages. Common IMAP > > clients I've seen start to exhibit severe performance issues beyond a > > few hundred thousand messages. > > As far as I'm aware (the helpde

Re: Fwd: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> > >> I don't actually know what sort of problems I'm referring to, hence the >> question. The big problem I can imagine would be opendir() and >> readdir() with a huge number of files in a directory, but the cyrus code >> doesn't appear to do that in a lot of places that would matter to a user >

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On 16 Nov 2010, at 13:38, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > > Our largest quota's a 4GB; without any issues. > > I think the issue you will encounter first is clients will start to > fall > down when folders exceed a 'reasonable' number of messages. Common > IMAP > clients I've seen start to exhib

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Adam Tauno Williams might have said: > On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 14:12 +0100, Rudy Gevaert wrote: > > On 11/16/2010 12:30 PM, Dave McMurtrie wrote: > > > Good morning, > > > This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there > > > anyone out there who allows unlim

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 14:12 +0100, Rudy Gevaert wrote: > On 11/16/2010 12:30 PM, Dave McMurtrie wrote: > > Good morning, > > This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there > > anyone out there who allows unlimited quota for their users or provides > > extremely large quotas whe

Re: Fwd: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> I don't actually know what sort of problems I'm referring to, hence the > question. The big problem I can imagine would be opendir() and > readdir() with a huge number of files in a directory, but the cyrus code > doesn't appear to do that in a lot of places that would matter to a user > (dele

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On 11/16/2010 12:30 PM, Dave McMurtrie wrote: > Good morning, > > This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there > anyone out there who allows unlimited quota for their users or provides > extremely large quotas when asked for? > > If so, can you describe any problems you've had

Fwd: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

I didn't realize that I only responded to Rob here. Perhaps my additional information will shed some light on the kind of information I'm looking for. Original Message Subject: Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas? Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 07:06:53 -0500 Fro

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

> On 11/16/2010 06:45 AM, Gavin McCullagh wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Dave McMurtrie wrote: >> >>> This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there >>> anyone out there who allows unlimited quota for their users or provides >>> extremely large quotas when asked for? >

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

On 11/16/2010 06:45 AM, Gavin McCullagh wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Dave McMurtrie wrote: > >> This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there >> anyone out there who allows unlimited quota for their users or provides >> extremely large quotas when asked for? > > What d

Re: Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

Hi, On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Dave McMurtrie wrote: > This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there > anyone out there who allows unlimited quota for their users or provides > extremely large quotas when asked for? What do you regard as extremely large? 10GB, 100GB, 1TB, ...?

Does anyone allow unlimited or extremely large quotas?

Good morning, This may be slightly off-topic, so apologies in advance. Is there anyone out there who allows unlimited quota for their users or provides extremely large quotas when asked for? If so, can you describe any problems you've had with this? Thanks, Dave Cyrus Home Page: http://

Re: replication

Quoting Shuvam Misra : Quoting Bron Gondwana : > > It's getting better, but it's still not 100% reliable to have > master/master replication between two servers with interactions > going to both sides. > > It SHOULD be safe now to have a single master/master setup with > individual users on one

Re: lmtpd: deliver.db checkpointing

On 15/11/2010 14:46, Patrick Boutilier wrote: > On 11/15/2010 10:36 AM, David Mayo wrote: >> >> Having looked at the source code, we can see that ctl_cyrusdb does not >> touch deliver.db and it is not possible to force checkpoints on or off >> within lmtpd. Ideally we want to schedule the checkpo