On 12.4.2012, at 13.58, Ed W wrote: > The claim by ZFS/BTRFS authors and others is that data silently "bit rots" on > it's own. The claim is therefore that you can have a raid1 pair where neither > drive reports a hardware failure, but each gives you different data?
That's one reason why I planned on adding a checksum to each message in dbox. But I forgot to actually do that. I guess I could add it for new messages in some upcoming version. Then Dovecot could optionally verify the checksum before returning the message to client, and if it detects corruption perhaps automatically read it from some alternative location (e.g. if dsync replication is enabled ask from another replica). And Dovecot index files really should have had some small (8/16/32bit) checksums of stuff as well..
