search for: 102579

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "102579".

Did you mean: 10257
2019 Dec 19
2
Dovecot, pigeonhole and hardlinks
...e filtering) was used. The reply was that, while hardlink worked well for non-filtered messages, using pigeonhole broke the hardlink (ie: some message-specific data was appended to the actual mail file). Here you can find the original thread: https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2015-November/102579.html I would ask the same things today: is dovecot+pigeonhole capable of storing the same incoming message, sent to multiple rcpt or to a group/alias expanding in multiple recipients, as a single hardlink? Note: I know about SIS, but it has some important drawback and I would avoid using it....
2020 Jan 02
3
Dovecot, pigeonhole and hardlinks
...s that, while hardlink worked well for non-filtered >> messages, using pigeonhole broke the hardlink (ie: some >> message-specific data was appended to the actual mail file). Here you >> can find the original thread: >> https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2015-November/102579.html >> >> I would ask the same things today: is dovecot+pigeonhole capable of >> storing the same incoming message, sent to multiple rcpt or to a >> group/alias expanding in multiple recipients, as a single hardlink? >> >> Note: I know about SIS, but it has...
2019 Dec 23
0
Dovecot, pigeonhole and hardlinks
...gt; The reply was that, while hardlink worked well for non-filtered > messages, using pigeonhole broke the hardlink (ie: some message-specific > data was appended to the actual mail file). Here you can find the > original thread: > https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2015-November/102579.html > > I would ask the same things today: is dovecot+pigeonhole capable of > storing the same incoming message, sent to multiple rcpt or to a > group/alias expanding in multiple recipients, as a single hardlink? > > Note: I know about SIS, but it has some important drawback...
2020 Jan 03
0
Dovecot, pigeonhole and hardlinks
...rdlink worked well for non-filtered >>> messages, using pigeonhole broke the hardlink (ie: some >>> message-specific data was appended to the actual mail file). Here >>> you can find the original thread: >>> https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2015-November/102579.html >>> >>> I would ask the same things today: is dovecot+pigeonhole capable of >>> storing the same incoming message, sent to multiple rcpt or to a >>> group/alias expanding in multiple recipients, as a single hardlink? >>> >>> Note: I know...