Hi,
First of all congratulations for you development. It?s really good.
We have a customer that has a copy of all inbound and outbound mail in
an account. When he tries to open the mail, the process of index all
mail consume all cpu and memory. How can we avoid this kinds of things?
Thank you in advance,
Lucas
* Lucas -LandM- <lucas at landm.net>:> > Hi, > > First of all congratulations for you development. It?s really good. > We have a customer that has a copy of all inbound and outbound mail in > an account. When he tries to open the mail, the process of index all > mail consume all cpu and memory. How can we avoid this kinds of things?Use dovecot's deliver program when delivering to that mailbox. This will keep the index up-to-date. -- Ralf Hildebrandt (Ralf.Hildebrandt at charite.de) plonk at charite.de Postfix - Einrichtung, Betrieb und Wartung Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155 http://www.arschkrebs.de Program aborting: Close all that you have worked on. You ask far too much.
> First of all congratulations for you development. It?s really good. > We have a customer that has a copy of all inbound and outbound mail > in an account. When he tries to open the mail, the process of index > all mail consume all cpu and memory. How can we avoid this kinds of > things?OS? How many messages? Maildir or mbox? The index will have to be built, but maybe you can set it at a lower nice level?
Hi Charles,
RedHat 4.0, Maildir, 3 Gb. of volume, and about 6k msgs.
Never finish the build task, could I force to exec the process for this
user?
Thank you,
Lucas
Charles Marcus wrote:>> First of all congratulations for you development. It?s really good. We
>> have a customer that has a copy of all inbound and outbound mail
>> in an account. When he tries to open the mail, the process of index
>> all mail consume all cpu and memory. How can we avoid this kinds of
>> things?
>
>
> OS? How many messages? Maildir or mbox?
>
> The index will have to be built, but maybe you can set it at a lower
> nice level?
(Ccing again the list in case someone else has similar problems) On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 20:14 +0200, Lucas -LandM- wrote:> Hi Timo, > > I patched the source and same result. We think the problem is because > everytime user access to his mailbox, dovecot do the index again. And it > consume near the 80% in iowait because, as strace shows, read all mails.The problem isn't that Dovecot indexes it. The problem is that Dovecot ISN'T indexing it. Dovecot commits changes to cache file only after a FETCH command finished successfully. So if the client is disconnected in the middle of doing the FETCH, all of the work that Dovecot did so far gets lost on Dovecot's side. And apparently your client also starts everything from the beginning, even though it already knew some of the messages' sizes.. So the previous patch I sent was supposed to prevent this because originally Dovecot was the one that disconnected the client. It logged "Disconnected for inactivity in reading our output" as the disconnect reason. This shouldn't happen anymore after you patched it, so why did the client still get disconnected? Anyway, here's another patch that makes Dovecot not forget all of its work if the client gets disconnected in the middle of FETCH: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.0/rev/e1cd11c5e00a If the client is still disconnecting, it probably takes a couple of tries to get everything read and cached, but after that it should all work nicely. Here's a similar patch for POP3: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-1.0/rev/86766f448e50 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20070617/cf51580e/attachment-0002.bin>