search for: hostpoint

...river: ciss We didn't try stuff like FB 8.3 because we'd like to have userland dtrace and it's lot of work for transferring productive systems to that - maybe we will have to in future. So the only question now: Is somebody else experiencing similar issues? Maybe on hp support os? -- Hostpoint AG | The Data Residence | St. Dionysstrasse 31 | Postfach | CH-8640 Rapperswil-Jona Tel +41 844 800777 | Fax +41 844 090909 | http://www.hostpoint.ch

...src() at netisr_dispatch_src+0x152 ixgbe_rxeof() at ixgbe_rxeof+0x1b9 ixgbe_msix_que() at ixgbe_msix_que+0x8d intr_event_execute_handlers() at intr_event_execute_handlers+0x6a ithread_loop() at ithread_loop+0xb4 fork_exit() at fork_exit+0x135 fork_trampoline() at fork_trampoline+0xe [5] FreeBSD XY.hostpoint.net 9.1-RC3 FreeBSD 9.1-RC3 #4 r242695: Wed Nov 7 11:33:17 UTC 2012 root at XY.hostpoint.ch:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/HOSTPOINT amd64 kernconf: ---- include GENERIC ident HOSTPOINT # ipfw options IPFIREWALL options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE options IPFIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT=5 optio...

He's the maintainer ;) > The official FreeBSD ports system does not even have the Dovecot 2.3.9 > port available yet. I think it is a little premature to start making > changes or modifications until the port maintainer has had a chance to > avail himself of the problem, if one exists. >

Thanks, build passed on FreeBSD 11.3 Greetings Pascal

Greetings We are looking into a solution to set up full text search for our multiple Dovecot instances. According to the Dovecot Wiki, fts_solr is one of the recommended plugins to use. Since we have more than just a few hundred mailboxes, I guess one Solr instance will not suffice. So I took a look at SolrCloud and set up a small cluster with three nodes and shards. I have no preceding

Hi I've just tried to build the latest Dovecot 2.3.9 on FreeBSD 11.3. Without success...It fails on the following commit which was introduced in 2.3.9: https://github.com/dovecot/core/commit/c85f1bc3ce612c736c9d2c468cc08306db1b5851 Following output is the build log: https://pastebin.com/3nvSeDn8 So I guess it has to do with some changes FreeBSD made: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18630

Hi We tried to update our Dovecot Director-Ring to 2.3 (latest version) and had one problem/bug. When we try to deliver an email from Exim to a receiving Dovecot (2.3 latest) via the LMTP-Proxy the LMTP process stays open forever and never closes. So after a few hours, we hit the LMPT-Process limit.? The problem only exists if the receiving Dovecot reports "Quota exceeded (mailbox for user

Hi I tried to get some logs: https://pastebin.com/Z8xVzpzW As you can see the process isn't shutdown and still in transaction as long dovecot is running. It destroyed the transaction when I stopped Dovecot. And this behavior only happens when the mailbox of user is full... Any Ideas how to debug this correctly? > So far, I haven't been able to reproduce anything weird at this end.

Hi Stephan We tried it again last week with the latest dovecot version and still having the same issue. The whole setup works perfectly fine with the latest version of dovecot 2.2 The problem only exists if the quota of the user is full, every other message gets delivered without a problem, and the lmtp process change back to READY state. But in this case, it stays in the "RCPT TO? forever.

On 16.10.20 18:34, Patrik Peng wrote: > On 16.10.20 18:00, Scott Q. wrote: >> This reminds me, the way I was able to reproduce this consistently >> was by having large headers ( 100+ lines ). >> >> >> On Friday, 16/10/2020 at 11:49 Patrik Peng wrote: >> >> On 19.08.20 17:37, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug

On 19.08.20 17:37, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 17:03:57 +0200, Alessio Cecchi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> after the upgrade to Dovecot 2.3.11.3, from 2.3.10.1, I see frequently >> these errors from different users: > It looks like this has been around for a while and you just got unlucky and > started seeing this now. Here's a quick

On 16.10.20 18:00, Scott Q. wrote: > This reminds me, the way I was able to reproduce this consistently was > by having large headers ( 100+ lines ). > > > On Friday, 16/10/2020 at 11:49 Patrik Peng wrote: > > On 19.08.20 17:37, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 17:03:57 +0200, Alessio Cecchi wrote: >>> Hi,