-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Harm van Tilborg wrote:
> No, it's really 'rubbish' :]. I've posted this in the 'some experiences
> with 5.5' thread before, but here we go:
My apologies :)
> [cv] ~# ls -l /home/vpopmail/domains/example.com
> total 28
> drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 4096 2009-04-07 23:47 harm
> drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 4096 2009-04-07 23:47 info
> drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 4096 2009-04-07 23:44 postmaster
> -rw------- 1 vpopmail vchkpw 468 2009-04-07 23:51 vpasswd
> -rw------- 1 vpopmail vchkpw 2604 2009-04-07 23:51 vpasswd.cdb
> drwx------ 3 vpopmail vchkpw 4096 2009-04-07 23:48 wilbert
> [cv] ~# /home/vpopmail/bin/vusagec wilb...@example.com
> wilb...@example.com: 1035916107 byte(s) in 5324 file(s)
> [cv] ~# /home/vpopmail/bin/vusagec i...@example.com
> i...@example.com: 594049032 byte(s) in 4041 file(s)
> [cv] ~# /home/vpopmail/bin/vusagec h...@example.com
> h...@example.com: 38496 byte(s) in 17 file(s)
> [cv] ~# /home/vpopmail/bin/vusagec postmas...@example.com
> postmas...@example.com: 8192 byte(s) in 2 file(s)
> [cv] ~# /home/vpopmail/bin/vusagec @example.com
> example.com: 3701844041 byte(s) in 20032 file(s)
> [cv] ~# du -sb /home/vpopmail/domains/example.com
> 1631164507 /home/vpopmail/domains/example.com
>
> Summing all usage values of individual users, I get:
> 1035916107 + 594049032 + 38496 + 8192 = 1630011827
> That's nearly the same as `du' returns.
Well, this definitely would indicate an issue with the domain usage calculation.
Fortunately, the domain usage calculation is tied directly into the user usage
calculation.
There's probably some pretty stupid mistake that I made just waiting to be
corrected.
> However, see what `vusagec' returns when I query `...@example.com'. That's
> still an enormous difference. Has this maybe something to do with the
> fact that example.com also has an alias example.org?
Nope. In fact, the vusage daemon sees these as entirely different domains.
This is something I intend to tackle in 5.5 -- recognition of domain aliases
for efficiency's sake.
> I'll give you access to this machine once it's up and running again,
> haha. It was our spare one, which had to do some actual work after a
> crash this week :].
I appreciate the offer, but probably not needed in this case because I can
duplicate the issue on my end.
> I've seen some of that code in the repository yeah. A real wild guess,
> without any knowledge of the code itself: maybe it has something to do
> with the fact that data is loaded after the worker threads have already
> started processing their queue items?
Nope. The queue mutex is locked at start-up, and so the workers cannot process
anything.
- --
/*
Matt Brookings <m...@inter7.com> GnuPG Key FAE0672C
Software developer Systems technician
Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. (815)776-9465
*/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkqgK0IACgkQIwet2/rgZywS6wCfeXLYeIDHUYF71cCyQO1clMiz
ih0An3M1YgYt1fIBqWtuYpC4lJLCmnaF
=TaOs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
