search for: skip_bodi

Does anyone know if it's possible to do FTS Index based on a userdb preference ? Basically if the preference is 'on' , dovecot goes ahead with the fts indexing for that particular user. I'm guessing right now it's not possible but is there anyone that could envision writing such a patch ? If so, can you contact me off-list ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

Core was generated by `dovecot/indexer-worker'. Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault. #0 0x00007f30f7ad056d in __exchange_and_add (__val=-1, __mem=0xfffffffffffffff8) at /usr/src/debug/gcc-4.8.5-20150702/obj-x86_64-redhat-linux/x86_64-redhat-linux/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/atomicity.h:49 49 { return __atomic_fetch_add(__mem, __val, __ATOMIC_ACQ_REL); } (gdb) bt full #0

On 10/05/2015 5:47 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: >> How do I go about debugging this further? How do I go about >> getting a backtrace on what is essentially a child process that >> doesn't produce a core? (Note that my installation normally does >> produce cores when it crashes, so there's something different about >> these indexer processes..) > > One

Hello, I recently upgraded to dovecot 2.0.2 (on gentoo ~amd64) and now fts_squat's index building seems to hang for some of my mailboxes. The imap process gets stuck at 100% cpu usage and dovecot.index.search is never touched. I traced the problem to a message (attached) for one of the problematic mailboxes. Also attached are a full backtrace and the output of dovecot -n. The problem

Hi, I've just enabled FTS via Lucene on my Dovecot 2.2.24 installation but I see the indexer crashing ?always?. This simple testcase with a very tiny testing mailbox exposes the issue immediately: doveadm -v index -u anmesse INBOX Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. rescan_clear_unseen_mailbox (rescan_ctx=rescan_ctx at entry=0x0, vname=0x555555839820 "INBOX.Testfolder

It's actually 4 crashes in the same minute: Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 04:28:35 +0100 GNU gdb (GDB) 7.0.1-debian Copyright (C) 2009 Free Software Foundation, Inc. License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html> This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Type "show copying"

On 10 May 2015, at 06:19, Reuben Farrelly <reuben-dovecot at reub.net> wrote: > > I'm now seeing these crashes in the indexing code: > > May 10 12:22:32 tornado.reub.net dovecot: master: Dovecot v2.2.17.rc1 (3903badc4ee0+) starting up for imap, lmtp, sieve > ... > May 10 13:07:50 tornado.reub.net dovecot: indexer: Error: Indexer worker disconnected, discarding 1

The log says: Jan 10 19:41:19 postamt dovecot: imap(heixxxxe): Panic: file squat-trie.c: line 876 (squat_build_word): assertion failed: (i + bytelen <= size) Jan 10 19:41:19 postamt dovecot: imap(heixxxxe): Error: Raw backtrace: /usr/dovecot-2/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so.0(+0x3b861) [0xb7639861] -> /usr/dovecot-2/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so.0(+0x3b8cf) [0xb76398cf] ->

Hi, I have a mailbox where indexing fails with the following error: # /opt/dovecot2/bin/doveadm -c /tmp/dovecot.conf -o mail_location=/tmp/skesselring index '*' doveadm(root): Panic: file charset-iconv.c: line 132 (charset_to_utf8): assertion failed: (*src_size - pos <= CHARSET_MAX_PENDING_BUF_SIZE) doveadm(root): Error: Raw backtrace:

This may be identical to the one I posted previously. >From the log: Jan 12 15:25:55 postamt dovecot: imap(mfxxxch): Panic: file squat-trie.c: line 876 (squat_build_word): assertion failed: (i + bytelen <= size) Jan 12 15:25:55 postamt dovecot: imap(mfxxxch): Error: Raw backtrace: /usr/dovecot-2/lib/dovecot/libdovecot.so.0(+0x3b861) [0xb7721861] ->

that seems to fix this kevent() problem, but I got the following lucene assert. Is that because of previous fails? Also, while I have your attention, is fts_autoindex supposed to work accross NAMESPACES? doveadm(mrm): Debug: Mailbox LISTS/vse-l: Opened mail UID=39483 because: fts indexing doveadm(mrm): Debug: Mailbox LISTS/vse-l: Opened mail UID=39484 because: fts indexing doveadm(mrm): Debug:

Hi! We found some problems with those patches, and ended up doing slightly different fix: https://github.com/dovecot/core/compare/3e41b3d%5E...cca98b.patch Aki On 24.10.2016 10:17, Aki Tuomi wrote: > Hi! > > Can you try these two patches? > > Aki > > > On 24.10.2016 08:48, Aki Tuomi wrote: >> Ok so that timeval makes no sense. We'll look into it. >>