similar to: Non-destructive deduplication

> On June 10, 2017 at 10:30 PM Tristan Miller <psychonaut at nothingisreal.com> wrote: > > > Greetings. > > I use Dovecot 2.2.29.1 as my IMAP server. Owing to a bug in my mail > client [1], several unique messages (mostly in my Sent folder) have > duplicate Message-ID headers. Dovecot itself doesn't seem to be > bothered by this, though my mail client is

Greetings. Possibly as the result of buggy tagging software, several hundred of my Ogg Vorbis files exhibit the following warning when examined by ogginfo: WARNING: Vorbis stream 1 does not have headers correctly framed. Terminal header page contains additional packets or has non-zero granulepos Nonetheless, most media players can play these files without any problem. A notable exception is

Dear all, several users have reported that they were unable to move/delete folders using Thunderbird and they got the message "Renaming not supported across conflicting directory permissions". When I google for this message, I see hints like "your mail may not be all on the same volume", but here this is definitely not the case. All mail is in /var/mail/virtual and owned by

>Wasn't our (lld/ELF's) position on debug info size that we should focus on providing a great split-dwarf workflow and not try go too far out of our way to deduplicate >or otherwise reduce debug info size inside LLD? I recall there being some patches that made linking of large debug binaries like 1.5GB+ clang faster, but we decided to >reject those changes because split-dwarf was

?But could not we for example do split dwarf, but for example do dedup of types ? I do not mean right now, but in a theory ? Best regards, George | Developer | Access Softek, Inc ________________________________ От: David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> Отправлено: 16 декабря 2017 г. 22:25 Кому: George Rimar Копия: Sean Silva; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; Rui Ueyama; Rafael Espindola Тема:

>Not quite sure what you mean by "on linker side" - but I guess you mean using linker features like comdats etc, rather than DWARF parsing/reassembly/etc. I mean that it probably not a good idea for external library. I feel it is much more convinent to do such proccessing in a linker. Linker do and knows much more about things like sections that are ICFed, eliminated, about COMDATs

>Postprocessing (ie: running a tool on the fully linked binary with the debug info we have today, and having the tool reprocess the debug info to make it more >compact) is an option, but wouldn't help address the problem you started with - that the output can't fit the large offsets, so the output is invalid/broken. So that >output would be broken before the postprocessing step

Hi all ! We have an issue with LLD, it is "relocation R_X86_64_32 out of range" (PR31109) which occurs during resolving relocations in debug sections. It looks happens because .debug_info section can be too large sometimes and 32x relocation is not enough to represent the value. One of possible solutions looks to be to deduplicate information to reduce .debug_info size. The rest of

Thanks for providing the experimental data! It clearly shows the value of type sections in DWARF. Regarding why type sections are off by default, aside from the issue of consumers needing to understand them, there is a size penalty to type sections that becomes more evident in smaller projects (meaning, fewer compilation units). The size penalty can be balanced against the amount of

>*nod* That's been the historic ELF+DWARF approach, but both MacOS (with dsyms+DWARF) and Windows >(COFF+CodeView+PDB) don't do it that way, and instead involve the linker to a degree. >Mostly I'm wondering if it'd be reasonable to (and if anyone would be interested in doing it) do >something more like the PDB support - fully debug-aware linking. Honestly saying I only

>If you're interested in things you can do in the linker for this - you might consider something more aggressive: Fully DWARF aware deduplication. > >This could be done hopefully by reusing some of the code in the dsymutil implementation in LLVM. > >This would be much more effective (and without the possible context-sensitive tradeoffs) than using type units. >Though

On 3/9/2016 9:02 PM, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote: > On 08 Mar 2016, at 01:50, Pavel Stano <stanojr at websupport.sk> wrote: >> >> sis attachment deduplication is broken in 2.2.16 upwards. >> It is caused by this commit. >> https://github.com/dovecot/core/commit/664bf3e236c214aee86294483c379e4fa66c2e63 >> >> in src/lib-fs/fs-sis.c function

Have you considered to introduce a "deduplicate mode" for rsync, replacing duplicate files in the destination directory by hard links? Of course there might be a lot of problems together with this feature, but on creating backups it could help to save a lot of disk space. --link-dest might be interesting in this context, too. Regards Harri

On 13.2.2015 16:59, Kevin Laurie wrote: > Dear Jiri, > > I tried the following to try to get the inbox deduplicated. My inbox is > quite large and urgently need to remove the duplicated messages. > Is there an easy way to do this? > Sorry for being so presistant but I need help. > > The command I tried:- > > doveadm deduplicate -u user at domain.net mailbox inbox

Hi, Even though this question does not only concern LLVM, it seems that only compilers guru can answer it. So I am giving a try here, hoping for the best. In a recent talk by Chandler Carruth, “Performance with algorithms, efficiency with data structures” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNmRkzxHWs <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHNmRkzxHWs> ), Chandler says that one should never

On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 11:40 AM George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> wrote: > Or following workflow: > > Split dwarf is used to make linker to proccess less, like relocations, > right ? > Partly, though the main motivation as far as I know, was to have to provide fewer bytes to the linker at all. That's why something like Apple's scheme (leave the debug info in

Hello, I'm trying to create automated backup recovery using "doveadm import" and "doveadm deduplicate". During testing I noticed that deduplicate only deletes some duplicates and has to be called multiple times to find them all. Here's what I've been trying (in shell commands): First, expunge inbox (the end result is the same even if you delete only some

I have deduplication active in my first mdbox: type mailbox, but how do I find out how well the deduplication works? Is there a way of finding out how much disk space I saved (if I saved some :) )? -- Ralf Hildebrandt Gesch?ftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charit? - Universit?tsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax:

Dear Jiri Noted. Thanks On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:15 PM, Jiri Bourek <bourek at thinline.cz> wrote: > On 13.2.2015 15:54, Kevin Laurie wrote: > >> Hello, >> I just migrated my emails from gmail using getmail. >> In the process I got some emails that have been doubled or tripled >> How do I run the doveadm command to delete copies of same emails? >>

Hi list, is there any working solution for deduplication of data for centos? We are trying to find a solution for our backup server which runs a bash script invoking xdelta(3). But having this functionality in fs is much more friendly... We have looked into lessfs, sdfs and ddar. Are these filesystems ready to use (on centos)? ddar is sthg different, I know. Thx Rainer