similar to: v2.2.32 release candidate released

https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.32.tar.gz https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.32.tar.gz.sig Two more fixes since rc2. And repeating: There are various changes in this release that can be used to significantly reduce disk IO with: 1) NFS storage especially, but I guess also other remote filesystems and even some with local disks 2) When mail storage and INDEX storage are

https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.32.tar.gz https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/dovecot-2.2.32.tar.gz.sig Two more fixes since rc2. And repeating: There are various changes in this release that can be used to significantly reduce disk IO with: 1) NFS storage especially, but I guess also other remote filesystems and even some with local disks 2) When mail storage and INDEX storage are

https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.32.rc1.tar.gz https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.32.rc1.tar.gz.sig There are various changes in this release that can be used to significantly reduce disk IO with: 1) NFS storage especially, but I guess also other remote filesystems and even some with local disks 2) When mail storage and INDEX storage are separated * imapc: Info-level

https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.32.rc1.tar.gz https://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.32.rc1.tar.gz.sig There are various changes in this release that can be used to significantly reduce disk IO with: 1) NFS storage especially, but I guess also other remote filesystems and even some with local disks 2) When mail storage and INDEX storage are separated * imapc: Info-level

Timo Sirainen wrote: Thanks for the reply -- I think I can now write a new config to test these tasty features out. >>> + mail_location can now include NO-NOSELECT parameter. This >>> automatically deletes any \NoSelect mailboxes that have no children. >>> These mailboxes are sometimes confusing to users. >> >> Sorry for my IMAP ignorance, but how can

On 16 Aug 2017, at 8.37, Alexey Asemov (Alex/AT) <lists at alex-at.ru> wrote: > > Hello Timo, > > I am quite eager to test it, but I don't know if these changes can be applicable for my configuration (it is shared storage one, any mdbox on NFS can be accessed by multiple servers, I made it so it's mostly accessed by one, but at certain conditions multiple servers still

Hello Timo, I am quite eager to test it, but I don't know if these changes can be applicable for my configuration (it is shared storage one, any mdbox on NFS can be accessed by multiple servers, I made it so it's mostly accessed by one, but at certain conditions multiple servers still access mailbox simultaneously). So if possible I want to ask few dumb questions: - I assume

Hi, I tried to migrate my dovecot 2.2 to a new server with a other storage configuration and dovecot 2.3. New (and old) Server uses mysql for user information I use the following storage settings mail_home = /storage1/vmail/%{userdb:path} mail_location =

# 2.3.4.1 (f79e8e7e4): /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf Hello, we're using mail on NFS and the indexes on localdisk, with a director setup. (18K+ users) now to get more performance i thought to use the ITERINDEX option. however this has the side-effect on some mailboxes that it doesn't show the subfolders under INBOX. they seem 'disappeared'. Removing the ITERINDEX option fixes this

Hello, it's the first time for me writing to the list, I'm trying to change the location into which the Dovecot's locks are done reserving a special temporary directory on an other partition, then adding to the dovecont.conf the line: mail_location = maildir:~/Maildir:VOLATILEDIR=/tmp_lock/%2.256Nu/%u so that through the VOLATILEDIR directive the locks should be written in this

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 7:30 AM, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: > > > On October 26, 2017 at 4:30 PM Federico Bartolucci <federico at aruba.it> > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > it's the first time for me writing to the list, I'm trying to change the > > location into which the Dovecot's locks are done reserving

There's a bug in "folder delete" for lazy expunge, type "1 namespace", as descibed on https://wiki2.dovecot.org/Plugins/Lazyexpunge When trying to delete a mailbox that still has messages in it, but that has no EXPUNGED/<name> counterpart, the process hangs after the imap "DELETE" command, and the following appears in the log file after a 60s timeout: Jun

I did a debug output of the dsync-server and found out that it queries the userdb parameter but doesn't use it. --- Debug: Loading modules from directory: /usr/lib/dovecot/modules Debug: Module loaded: /usr/lib/dovecot/modules/lib01_acl_plugin.so Debug: Module loaded: /usr/lib/dovecot/modules/lib02_lazy_expunge_plugin.so Debug: Module loaded: /usr/lib/dovecot/modules/lib10_quota_plugin.so

Hello, I'm using dovecot on my personal / private email server. I have set up virtual mailboxes in my inbox namespace like this: namespace inbox { inbox = yes prefix = "Virtual/" separator = / location = "virtual:~/.emails_virtual:LAYOUT=fs:INDEX=dovecot.virtual.index:LISTINDEX=dovecot.virtual.list.index" list = yes subscriptions = yes mailbox { auto =

Using 2.3.8 and mail_location = maildir:/var/mail/%Ln:CONTROL=/var/lib/dovecot/control/%Ln:VOLATILEDIR=/var/lib/dovecot/control/%Ln:INDEX=/var/lib/dovecot/control/%Ln + also user_query = SELECT ... CONCAT('maildir:/var/mail/', LOWER(u.login), '/:CONTROL=/var/lib/dovecot/control/%Ln:VOLATILEDIR=/var/lib/dovecot/control/%Ln:INDEX=/var/lib/dovecot/control/%Ln') AS mail, ... but I

On 2018-10-05 11:35, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On 4 Oct 2018, at 17.13, Tom Sommer <mail at tomsommer.dk> wrote: >> >> >> On 2018-10-04 15:55, Timo Sirainen wrote: >>> On 4 Oct 2018, at 14.39, Tom Sommer <mail at tomsommer.dk> wrote: >> >>>> Is this correct, and if so are there any plans to move dotlocks etc. >>>> to this

Hi According to the docs, setting VOLATILEDIR will improve I/O performance when using NFS - but as far as I can see, only vsize lock-files are put here, and little else? Is this correct, and if so are there any plans to move dotlocks etc. to this directory? Thanks. -- Tom

On 2018-10-04 15:55, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On 4 Oct 2018, at 14.39, Tom Sommer <mail at tomsommer.dk> wrote: >> Is this correct, and if so are there any plans to move dotlocks etc. >> to this directory? > > > What dotlocks? I guess mbox and Maildir have some locks that could be > moved there, but a better performance optimization for those > installations

On 5 Oct 2018, at 16.42, Tom Sommer <mail at tomsommer.dk <mailto:mail at tomsommer.dk>> wrote: > > On 2018-10-05 11:50, Tom Sommer wrote: >> On 2018-10-05 11:35, Timo Sirainen wrote: >>> On 4 Oct 2018, at 17.13, Tom Sommer <mail at tomsommer.dk <mailto:mail at tomsommer.dk>> wrote: >>>> On 2018-10-04 15:55, Timo Sirainen wrote:

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Harald Leithner <leithner at itronic.at> wrote: > Any idea why this doesn't setup work anymore in 2.2.32? > > thx > > Harald > > I just ran into the same thing myself. For me, when I added this to the "location" in the expunged namespace, it started working again: ...:LISTINDEX=expunged.list.index I can't tell you why