Hi Karsten --
Thanks for your response, I wasn't aware of these S3-compatible
possibilities! The "no downtime" option is always nice to have even for
smaller deployments.
Rich
From: "Karsten Otto"
To: server-user@james.apache.org
Date: 05/25/2024 10:19 AM
Subject:Re:
Hi Benoit --
What's inefficient about the JPA version compared to the others? And I
hope the Spring version isn't deprecated anytime soon since I've been
successfully using the Spring versions for years. They're about as simple
and secure as it gets for running your own free mail server
I successfully upgraded using a copied version of the Derby database. Went
to James 3.7.5 instead of 3.8.1 due to SpamAssassin conflicts but
otherwise everything worked.
From: tempbo...@hotmail.com
To: "James Users List"
Date: 04/19/2024 08:52 AM
Subject:Re: Migrating
Hi David --
Thanks for your input. I checked the drivers in both James releases and
they're identical: Derby 10.14.2.0. So I don't anticipate any versioning
issues. And this page on the Apache Derby site suggests you're right even
if the driver was upgraded:
Hello --
I'd like to upgrade a James instance (Spring wiring) from 3.3.0 to 3.8.1.
The 3.3.0 instance uses the standard embedded Derby database. To migrate
the data, can I simply copy the existing Derby database to the new 3.8.1
directory? If not, what is the procedure for upgrading?
Thank
Thanks for this release! I have an instance of James 3.3.0 using maildir
for the mailboxes. I was hoping to upgrade to 3.7.0 and convert to JPA
(Derby) using the instructions here:
https://james.apache.org/server/3/upgrade-database.html.
Is this still a viable option? The mailboxcopier is
Thanks Benoit --
I appreciate the response and your links.
Using Spring packaging is fairly convenient for my use cases right now.
Having to use Docker, Cassandra, etc. seems to be too resource-intensive
for my needs and would (I think) create a larger binary and use more RAM
and disk space.
