similar to: Connection closed reason

Hi, we have one user using the old Alpine client with IMAP. Time to time (3 times per day or 3 times per week) he get error: "MAIL FOLDER INBOX CLOSED DUE TO ACCESS ERROR" and he complains, that inbox stops to refresh with new emails. I don't know Alpine but I can imagine, that Alpine creates TCP connection to IMAPS and uses IDLE. I read wiki page about Timeouts [1] and it

"Miloslav" == Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> writes: Miloslav> Dne 09.09.2020 v 17:52 John Stoffel napsal(a): Miloslav> There is a one PCIe RAID controller in a chasis. AVAGO Miloslav> MegaRAID SAS 9361-8i. And 16x SAS 15k drives conneced to Miloslav> it. Because the controller does not support pass-through for

>>>>> "Miloslav" == Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> writes: Miloslav> Dne 09.09.2020 v 17:52 John Stoffel napsal(a): Miloslav> There is a one PCIe RAID controller in a chasis. AVAGO Miloslav> MegaRAID SAS 9361-8i. And 16x SAS 15k drives conneced to Miloslav> it. Because the controller does not support pass-through for Miloslav> the drives,

Dne 09.09.2020 v 17:52 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> There is a one PCIe RAID controller in a chasis. AVAGO > Miloslav> MegaRAID SAS 9361-8i. And 16x SAS 15k drives conneced to > Miloslav> it. Because the controller does not support pass-through for > Miloslav> the drives, we use 16x RAID-0 on controller. So, we get > Miloslav> /dev/sda ... /dev/sdp (roughly) in

>>>>> "Miloslav" == Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> writes: Miloslav> Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Me too... please look for further comments. Esp about 'fio' and Netapp useage. Miloslav> Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): Miloslav> Hello, Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs

Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> Hello, > Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: > Miloslav> "RAID-1 would be preferable" > Miloslav> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). >

>>>>> "Miloslav" == Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> writes: Miloslav> Hello, Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: Miloslav> "RAID-1 would be preferable" Miloslav> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). Miloslav> May I ask you

* Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> 2015.04.29 22:47: > is there any way, based on userdb/passwdb attribute, how to postpone an > email delivery? The purpose is, I need to freeze an account (Maildir++) for > a few minutes and new email must not be delivered. But emails must be > delivered when account is unfrozen. You can put the messages on hold and then release them

> On 7. Sep 2020, at 12.38, Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: "RAID-1 would be preferable" (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). May I ask you for the comments as from people around the Dovecot? > >

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Miloslav H?la wrote: > we have one user using the old Alpine client with IMAP. Time to time (3 times > per day or 3 times per week) he get error: "MAIL FOLDER INBOX CLOSED DUE TO > ACCESS ERROR" and he complains, that inbox stops to refresh with new emails. when I get this error, it's a network issue

Hi, is there any way, based on userdb/passwdb attribute, how to postpone an email delivery? The purpose is, I need to freeze an account (Maildir++) for a few minutes and new email must not be delivered. But emails must be delivered when account is unfrozen. I found few things about Postfix filters, but I'm not sure it's a good way. Thank you, Milo

On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 09:47:11 +0100 Miloslav Hůla via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Dne 2019-01-15 v 13:22 Miloslav Hůla via samba napsal(a): > > When I mount CIFS share (mount -t cids) with vers=1.0 I can perform > > getcifsacl sucessfully. But when I mount with vers=2.0, or 2.1, or > > 3.0, ACL reading fails. > > > > getxattr error: 95 >

> On 27 Mar 2015, at 10:19, Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > we are migrating from Cyrus 2.3.7 to Dovecot 2.2.13. We have ~7000 maildirs with ~500GB. Our goal is to do the migration without users have notice and with the shortest service downtime. The users use IMAP (with shared folders and ACL), POP3 and sieve filters. > > As a first

Dne 10.09.2020 v 17:40 John Stoffel napsal(a): >>> So why not run the backend storage on the Netapp, and just keep the >>> indexes and such local to the system? I've run Netapps for many years >>> and they work really well. And then you'd get automatic backups using >>> schedule snapshots. >>> >>> Keep the index files local on

One day, I'll use the LDAP. But infrastructure I got is quite neglected and some older admins is hard to convince to innovate. Just, aaaaah :) I read whole documentation related to userdb a and passdb. Easy to understand with relation to IMAP or POP3 access. But what I didn't understand is relation to LMTP. Which one is used and when for successful delivery. I'll try to move

Dne 07.09.2020 v 12:43 Sami Ketola napsal(a): >> On 7. Sep 2020, at 12.38, Miloslav H?la <miloslav.hula at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: "RAID-1 would be preferable" (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/7b364356-7041-7d18-bd77-f60e0e2e2112 at lechevalier.se/T/). May I ask you

Hello, we are running Dovecot (2.2.13-12~deb8u1) on Debian stable. Configured with Mailbox++, IMAP, POP3, LMTPD, Managesieved, ACL. Mailboxes are on local 1.2TB RAID, it's about 5310 accounts. We are slowly getting out of space and we are considering to move Mailboxes onto Netapp disk array with two independent network connections. Are there some pitfalls? Not sure we should use NTP or

The 9361-8i does support passthrough ( JBOD mode ). Make sure you have the latest firmware. On Wednesday, 09/09/2020 at 03:55 Miloslav H?la wrote: Hi, thank you for your reply. I'll continue inline... Dne 09.09.2020 v 3:15 John Stoffel napsal(a): > Miloslav> Hello, > Miloslav> I sent this into the Linux Kernel Btrfs mailing list and I got reply: > Miloslav> "RAID-1

Hi, we are migrating from Cyrus 2.3.7 to Dovecot 2.2.13. We have ~7000 maildirs with ~500GB. Our goal is to do the migration without users have notice and with the shortest service downtime. The users use IMAP (with shared folders and ACL), POP3 and sieve filters. As a first choice, we tried the Dovecot's dsync tool. First tests were great, but we are not able to change the Cyrus auth

Hi, we are planning to change hardware for our standalone Dovecot instance handling ~5800 IMAP users with 1TB mailboxes on local RAID. Is there some recommendation about CPU? We can choose from: - Intel Xeon E5-2620v4 - 2,1GHz at 8,0GT 20MB cache, 8core, HT, 85W, LGA2011 - Intel Xeon E5-2623v4 - 2,6GHz at 8,0GT 10MB cache, 4core, HT, 85W, LGA2011 The difference is about more cores vs. hi