similar to: Major bug with hardlinks and lmtp

I've been using dovecot for years, been working great. However recently I've come across two issues. The first issue unfortunately I have little information on, mail_debug hasn't provided anything useful either (in fact it looks like the login request that fails doesn't even get logged at all). During the morning rush of email, this server has around 11k mailboxes on it, it

Hello list, Excuse me for my poor english. I have updated on a test server dovecot 2.0.13 to dovecot 2.1.1. All works fine, but with the new version it seems that dovecot don't do hardlinks when deliver a message to multiple users. I have checked my config and the only rule I can see aboout that is maildir_copy_with_hardlinks = yes in /etc/dovecot/conf.d/10-mail.conf My mail location

Hi, Dovecotters. In the Maildir code, dovecot-0.99.10/src/lib-storage/index/maildir/maildir-copy.c, I see that hardlinks are used. It seems that (line 185) if MAILDIR_COPY_WITH_HARDLINKS is exported, then copying is attempted by using link. Having problems reading the source / flow of control, I resort to this list. When a file is linked, the mtime is naturally kept on the destination. This

Hi all, I have some updates on the hard-link discussion. First, let me explain that I installed a test machine with CentOS 7.1 and dovecot/pigeonhole version 2.2.10-4 and the results where identical on what I had on CentOS 6.7 and dovecot 2.0.9-19 The bottom line is that hardlinking works only when no, or at most only one, RCPT have sieve filtering. For example: - if no RCPT has sieve

Kevin Korb wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > rsync not needed: cp -al dir1 dir2 > Right now, neither is 'cp' (as of V8.21 - V10 inclusive) -- "apparently" (?) in response to this article: http://danwalsh.livejournal.com/64493.html. Right now, 'cp' tries to 'hardlink' to symlinks, which AFAIR has never been an option --

On 30 Nov 2015, at 10:21, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote: > > So, let me do a straigth question: is someone using dovecot/LMTP with hardlinking? To me, this seems a _very_ important feature, and I wonder if I am doing something wrong or if the feature (hardlink+sieve) simply does not exists. Hardlink+Sieve has never worked. The fix is a bit complicated. Here's my

I have a simple Sieve rule to protect me from accidentally deleting mail: fileinto :copy "backup"; Should I expect this backup to be hardlinked to the ordinary one? Obviously, that would make the backup be almost for free in terms of storage, but currently I do not see any linking. Using Maildir, by the way, and I have not touched the maildir_copy_with_hardlinks setting. TIA,

Dear List, this may be a little off-topic, but I failed to obtain the "mother of R"-reference through a couple of library services... Maybe someone can provide me with a PDF? Ross Ihaka and Robert Gentleman. R: A language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 5(3):299-314, 1996 Helmut Schuetz Biokinet GmbH A-1170 Vienna Tel +43(0)1

On 30 Nov 2015, at 17:48, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote: > > Hi Timo, > glad to know it is in your TODO list ;) It's been for many years. > Any rough ETA on that? Right now it doesn't seem likely to be developed anytime soon. > Thanks. > > On 30/11/2015 14:23, Timo Sirainen wrote: >> On 30 Nov 2015, at 10:21, Gionatan Danti <g.danti

Hi Timo, glad to know it is in your TODO list ;) Any rough ETA on that? Thanks. On 30/11/2015 14:23, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On 30 Nov 2015, at 10:21, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote: >> >> So, let me do a straigth question: is someone using dovecot/LMTP with hardlinking? To me, this seems a _very_ important feature, and I wonder if I am doing something wrong or

Il 03-01-2020 19:51 @lbutlr ha scritto: > On 03 Jan 2020, at 06:16, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote: >> What surprises me is that hard-linking identical messages saves so >> much space, yet nobody seems to asking/using such feature. >> So, either a) few cares about saving space or b) few are using the >> pigeonhole plugin. And both a) and b) seems

Dear group members, I want to compare response variables ("logAUC") of two groups (treatment "Test", "Reference") of a subset ("period == 1") in dataframe "resp" (below): sequence subject period treatment AUC logAUC 1 RT 1 1 Reference 44.1 3.786460 2 RT 1 2 Test 39.1 3.666122 3 RT 2

Hi, now it's time to come back to this topic. As supposed, the missing hardlinks where no issue of rsync. I am not sure if pairing aufs (http://aufs.sourceforge.net/) and rsync -RH will catch each and every hardlink compared to a single filesystem, but it seems to work very reliable. I tried mhdfs and aufs. Aufs is faster and very stable (I am on wheezy kernel 3.2). So at last I have my

> centos 7.x is latest, so if you need help upgrade make a bug report to > centos, not waste your time here since you choiced a precompiled > problem, reporting here 7s helpfull if you use dovecot compiled with > the latest version here, this migth be a unknown bug you then have > found, but not if you use precompiled problems, then report to the > maintainers of such software

Hi, hardlinking (-H) works perfectly while using a syntax like -avhxSDH <SRC> <DEST> Now I have to mirror multiple SRC directories which contain hardlinks. e. g: src1/a is a hardlink to src2/b -RavhxSDH SRC1 SRC2 DEST does not preserve hardlink a and b in DEST. Is there any chance to do that? Thanks lopiuh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

Il 23-12-2019 12:04 Gionatan Danti ha scritto: > On 19/12/19 11:08, Gionatan Danti wrote: >> Hi list, >> many moons ago I asked about preserving hardlink between identical >> messages when pigeonhole (for sieve filtering) was used. >> >> The reply was that, while hardlink worked well for non-filtered >> messages, using pigeonhole broke the hardlink (ie:

dear rsyncists, rsync is superb! but did i actually find a bug? i did: $ rsync -vRHSPa rsync://rsync.mirror.ac.uk/updates.redhat.com/7.3/en/os/SRPMS . into an empty local directory the result was 140 bogus hardlinks of the same file: -rw-rw-r-- 140 g g 6147582 2002/12/04 16:55:24 Canna-3.5b2-62.7.3.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 140 g g 6147582 2002/12/04 16:55:24

Emanuel Evans <emanuel.evans at gmail.com> writes: > Steffen Kaiser <skdovecot at smail.inf.fh-brs.de> writes: > >> Could you try what happens, if you create the hardlink manually as the >> vmail user _two_ times, if the first link() succeeds. Maybe: >> >> 1) hard links won't work on your encfs, >> 2) link() fails with "Operation not

Steffen Kaiser <skdovecot at smail.inf.fh-brs.de> writes: > Could you try what happens, if you create the hardlink manually as the > vmail user _two_ times, if the first link() succeeds. Maybe: > > 1) hard links won't work on your encfs, > 2) link() fails with "Operation not permitted" instead of "File exists" in > your case, if the target file

Hi all, any ideas? Especially point n.1 (no hardlink when sending the same email to multiple addresses) confuse me a bit. Searching in old messages I even stumbled on some users stating that, using Dovecot LMTP server, they achieved what I want (one messagge, multiple hardlinks), but I am _already_ using LMTP with no avail... Regards. On 27/06/15 18:18, Gionatan Danti wrote: > Hi all,