Bron Gondwana wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:55:55 +0200, "Rudy Gevaert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Ken Murchison wrote:
So, is it your opinion that this doesn't need to be fixed, or shouldn't
be fixed?
Te be honest, I would like to see it fixed.
Thanks in advance,
Rudy
Bringing back some context:
I'm busy looking at delayed delete. I'm using unix hierarchy seperator. I
deleted a mailbox and see it like this:
kavula.ugent.be> lm
DELETED/user/rudy.gevaert/Foo/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (\HasNoChildren)
user/rudy.gevaert/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (\HasNoChildren)
user/rudy.gevaert/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (\HasNoChildren)
user/rudy.gevaert/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (\HasNoChildren)
user/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (\HasChildren)
However the file system location is:
/var/cyrus/imap/domain/u/ugent.be/u/DELETED/user/rudy^gevaert/Foo/471364C1/
I would have thought it would be under domain/u/ugent.be/DELETED/user/...
Just to clarify exactly what you want, do you:
a) think that the DELETED folders should not be hashed? (your example)
Now I read it, my example wasn't that clear.
b) think they should be hashed based on the username rather than into 'u'?
Keeping the same filesystem layout I would either prefer
DELETED/user/rudy.gevaert/Foo/[EMAIL PROTECTED] to be located in
/somewhere/imap/domain/u/ugent.be/DELETED/r/user/rudy^gevaert/Foo/471364C1/
or have it in
/somewhere/imap/domain/u/ugent.be/r/user/rudy^gevaert/DELETED/Foo/471364C1/
c) think something entirely different should be done with them?
My (c) is as I posted in my followup:
We wrote our userhash patch so the locations would be:
/var/cyrus/imap/domain/u/ugent.be/user/rudy^gevaert/DELETED.user.rudy^gevaert.Foo.471364C1/
/var/cyrus/imap/domain/u/ugent.be/user/rudy^gevaert/user.rudy^gevaert
/var/cyrus/imap/domain/u/ugent.be/user/rudy^gevaert/user.rudy^gevaert.Inbox2
/var/cyrus/imap/domain/u/ugent.be/user/rudy^gevaert/user.rudy^gevaert.Trash
So that all the folders related to the same user are in the same directory
and have dots in their names as separators rather than being subdirectories
of each other. This is obviously only one of many options, and has the
downside that it's a completely new filesystem layout that requires a rehash
run for every folder rather than just affecting a few deleted folders.
I can see the advantages of this too! How do you think about this Ken?
(I'm not sure if this needs to be in 2.3.10 as it's a bit of a big change.)
With kind regards,
Rudy
--
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Rudy Gevaert [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel:+32 9 264 4734
Directie ICT, afd. Infrastructuur ICT Department, Infrastructure office
Groep Systemen Systems group
Universiteit Gent Ghent University
Krijgslaan 281, gebouw S9, 9000 Gent, Belgie www.UGent.be
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
