Re: [Dovecot] User with multiple domains
Peter Sparkes wrote: Timo Sirainen wrote: On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 17:06 +0100, Peter Sparkes wrote: When trying to retrieve email using Dovecot for t...@domaintwo.com the password is not recognised although it is for t...@domainone.com. .. auth default: verbose: yes debug: yes debug_passwords: yes So, what does it log with these? Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): Effective uid=1206, gid=1109 Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): maildir: data=/home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): maildir: root=/home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir, index=/home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir, control=, inbox= Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): open(/home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/.temp.silkliving.vm.bytemark.co.uk.3456.66ecc191bc79f78f) failed: Permission denied Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): file_dotlock_open() failed with file /home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/dovecot.index.log: Permission denied Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): open(/home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/.temp.silkliving.vm.bytemark.co.uk.3456.08d076a7e7a61ba4) failed: Permission denied Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): file_dotlock_open() failed with file /home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/dovecot.index.log: Permission denied Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): Couldn't open INBOX: Internal error occurred. Refer to server log for more information. [2009-06-02 23:23:23] Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): No INBOX for user top=0/0, retr=0/0, del=0/0, size=0 Jun 2 23:23:23 silkliving dovecot: pop3-login: Login: user=sa...@aandt.co.uk, method=PLAIN, rip=91.85.130.224, lip=89.16.164.21 The mail.warn log contains Jun 3 06:47:02 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): open(/home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/.temp.silkliving.vm.bytemark.co.uk.19161.eddfd8117a24d1aa) failed: Permission denied Jun 3 06:47:02 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): file_dotlock_open() failed with file /home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/dovecot.index.log: Permission denied Jun 3 06:47:02 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): open(/home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/.temp.silkliving.vm.bytemark.co.uk.19161.53f46bc81f5f7009) failed: Permission denied Jun 3 06:47:02 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): file_dotlock_open() failed with file /home/aandt.co.uk/sales/Maildir/dovecot.index.log: Permission denied Jun 3 06:47:02 silkliving dovecot: POP3(sa...@aandt.co.uk): Couldn't open INBOX: Internal error occurred. Refer to server log for more information. [2009-06-03 06:47:02] and the Maildir does not contain the following files which are in the user Maildir which are working correctly (these users only have email accounts in one domain): dovecot-uidlist, dovecot.index, dovecot.index.cache and dovecot.index.log Peter
Re: [Dovecot] v3.0 architecture
On Jun 2, 2009, at 11:39 AM, pod wrote: Timo Sirainen t...@iki.fi writes: The big problem is what the protocol should be. Use some existing RPC protocol? It should be something extensible so that a plugin in imap process can talk to a plugin in storage process, without the base processes knowing anything about the details (e.g. imap-quota plugin asking quota usage from storage's quota plugin). In any case the client side API should be asynchronous. That can make it annoyingly difficult to use though. Wonder if I could switch to erlang or something for the imap/pop3 processes :) I realise I'm coming a little late to this conversation. Various people have suggested various RPC mechanisms. Might I humbly suggest also looking at 9P (or 9P2000) the Plan9 filesystem protocol. [1] The general design philosophy in Plan9 is not to use an increasing number of application specific RPC mechanisms but instead to implement everything in a synthetic filesystem tree. I do kind of like that idea, but I don't really se how it would be practical here, especially if high performance is wanted. 1. I'm not implementing Dovecot to Plan9, so the filesystem would still have to be wrapped in some kind of a protocol. I suppose you could get them visible to filesystem using FUSE, but that would still be Linux-only. 2. Latency over network is pretty high, so a nice clean filesystem layout wouldn't probably be possible without sacrificing performance. And a non-clean layout probably would just make it horrible to use in all ways. Actually I think even the current lib-storage API won't be low-enough latency. Most IMAP commands should be able to be done by sending a single request and then reading responses. Well, I'm not going to start coding this anytime soon. Anyway, I'm still more concerned about how to implement the client side so that a single process can asynchronously process commands and handle multiple connections, without the code looking awful difficult to understand mess. I think it might be possible with C, but I'm not aware of any existing code that does it as cleanly as synchronous code looks like.
Re: [Dovecot] Help please- Post - Login Script--- Migration
Cheers will try Thanks for your help really appreciate.
2009/6/2 Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.us
Ashraf wrote:
Seth, I have tried to use most of them but whichever i use its creating
a
folder and then its creating the dovecot-uidlist and rest of the files.
please advice.
The variable ${HOME} - in your script, not in the mail_executable
setting - should give you what you want.
~Seth
--
Regards
Ashraf
Re: [Dovecot] expire tool - individual user/folder?
Hello, The patch shouldn't really have changed anything. in 1.1.16 it works without the patch. And I didn't fix anything in 1.1.16 either. Maybe it was some weird compiling issue or something.. i do not have an explanation, but effect is the same. i repackaged 1.1.15 with and without patch and only the one with the patch works. for 1.1.16 i do not need a patch. gcc is 4.1.2 but its not important for me, just some tests... Andre
Re: [Dovecot] record points outside file error with dovecot revision 9116:9ae55b68cf61
On Jun 2, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 13:24 -0400, jsie...@psu.edu wrote: dovecot: IMAP(testuser): Corrupted index cache file /full/path/ dovecot.index.cache: record points outside file So you're using AIX? Do you also happen to use NFS? Can you reproduce this error by running imaptest for a while? http://imapwiki.org/ImapTest No NFS here. The filesystem is called GPFS. It is a clustered FS. Ah, that probably explains it. Can multiple different servers modify the same mailbox? Cache file is the part of Dovecot that demands the most from the OS/filesystem. The most difficult part is probably that it writes to the file without locking. It first reserves a space and then starts writing there. Multiple processes can write to the same file at the same time. Timo, Are you saying that multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on the same IMAP server can cause this collision as well? Is there a difference between running multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on multiple IMAP servers vs running multiple processes on the same folder on a single IMAP server? This should probably be changed at some point, since it could just buffer more data to memory and then lock, write, unlock. That would also make the code simpler, since it can currently leave holes to the file because it has to guess initially how much space to reserve.. This is definitely on my wish list. Thanks, Jonathan smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [Dovecot] record points outside file error with dovecot revision 9116:9ae55b68cf61
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 09:31 -0400, Jonathan Siegle wrote: Are you saying that multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on the same IMAP server can cause this collision as well? Is there a difference between running multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on multiple IMAP servers vs running multiple processes on the same folder on a single IMAP server? I don't know. That depends on how GPFS is implemented. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] record points outside file error with dovecot revision 9116:9ae55b68cf61
On Jun 3, 2009, at 9:35 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 09:31 -0400, Jonathan Siegle wrote: Are you saying that multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on the same IMAP server can cause this collision as well? Is there a difference between running multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on multiple IMAP servers vs running multiple processes on the same folder on a single IMAP server? I don't know. That depends on how GPFS is implemented. Pick a local filesystem, say ext3? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [Dovecot] system accepts my domains without point
Esteban Torres Rodriguez wrote: I have postfix+ dovecot + ldap (AD). my system accepts u...@domain as u...@domain. as u...@domain.com. To send as much to create the mailbox when I login to squirrelmail, for example. Problem is postfix, dovecot or from AD? Someone can help me? It is something with postfix configuration. Check address rewriting rules.
Re: [Dovecot] v3.0 architecture
Timo Sirainen t...@iki.fi writes: I do kind of like that idea, but I don't really se how it would be practical here, especially if high performance is wanted. I don't really see why a priori it would be any less performant than any other particular RPC mechanism. 1. I'm not implementing Dovecot to Plan9, so the filesystem would still have to be wrapped in some kind of a protocol. I suppose you could get them visible to filesystem using FUSE, but that would still be Linux-only. I probably didn't explain well enough. One doesn't need to be implementing for or on a Plan9 system and there's no need for there to be any involvement with the OS or kernel's notion of filesystem. 9P is a _wire_ protocol for expressing filesystem hierarchy and I/O on files and dirs within that filesystem. I would like to say think of it as NFS simplified but even that will, I suspect, for lots of people draw with it far too much irrelevant baggage. It is a perfectly tractable proposition to implement both 9P servers and clients, e.g. wmii [1], solely with the assistance of a userland library, e.g. libixp [2]. 2. Latency over network is pretty high, so a nice clean filesystem layout wouldn't probably be possible without sacrificing performance. And a non-clean layout probably would just make it horrible to use in all ways. Agreed, careful design of the layout is rather important. But, I suggest, it requires no more or less care than goes into the design of a more traditional RPC mechanism - how are errors signalled, can more than one RPC be in flight at any one time, how is data marshalling done, etc. Using a synthetic filesystem at least provides a layer of abstraction that might help. I don't claim it makes it easier - it just provides a layer in which some of these questions are already answered. It's an alternate way to factorise the problem. Actually I think even the current lib-storage API won't be low-enough latency. Most IMAP commands should be able to be done by sending a single request and then reading responses. Well, I'm not going to start coding this anytime soon. I'm afraid I am sufficiently unfamiliar with the lib-storage API to comment on how straightforwardly one might map it to a 9P-using world. Anyway, I'm still more concerned about how to implement the client side so that a single process can asynchronously process commands and handle multiple connections, without the code looking awful difficult to understand mess. I think it might be possible with C, but I'm not aware of any existing code that does it as cleanly as synchronous code looks like. Very valid concerns. I don't think I am able to offer further insight though :-( Please forgive me if I come across as overly evangelistic. I do not intend to. It is an area of personal interest to me and it felt like it mapped onto your problem nicely. Thanks for listening. Footnotes: [1] http://wmii.suckless.org/ [2] http://libs.suckless.org/libixp
Re: [Dovecot] record points outside file error with dovecot revision 9116:9ae55b68cf61
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 12:11 -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 10:14 -0400, Jonathan Siegle wrote: On Jun 3, 2009, at 9:35 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 09:31 -0400, Jonathan Siegle wrote: Are you saying that multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on the same IMAP server can cause this collision as well? Is there a difference between running multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on multiple IMAP servers vs running multiple processes on the same folder on a single IMAP server? I don't know. That depends on how GPFS is implemented. Pick a local filesystem, say ext3? But with ext3 you can't have multiple servers accessing the same filesystem. But of course there are no problems (well, some very rare random ones maybe) having multiple processes accessing the same mailbox on the same server. Ever since I wrote my imaptest tool (a few years ago?) I've been heavily stress testing multiple connections modifying the mailbox at the same time. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Dovecot] Help please- Post - Login Script--- Migration
Thanks Seth. It works really appreciate your help. Well done.
2009/6/3 Ashraf ashraf...@googlemail.com
Cheers will try Thanks for your help really appreciate.
2009/6/2 Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.us
Ashraf wrote:
Seth, I have tried to use most of them but whichever i use its creating
a
folder and then its creating the dovecot-uidlist and rest of the files.
please advice.
The variable ${HOME} - in your script, not in the mail_executable
setting - should give you what you want.
~Seth
--
Regards
Ashraf
--
Regards
Ashraf
Re: [Dovecot] Lost sub-mailboxes - not showing after upgrading to Dovecot from Courier-IMAP
On Jun 3, 2009, at 7:46 PM, James Brown wrote: Last night we migrated from Courier-IMAP to Dovecot 1.2RC5 and all seems to work fairly well, but I seem to have lost all my mailboxes apart from INBOX. http://wiki.dovecot.org/MissingMailboxes
Re: [Dovecot] Lost sub-mailboxes - not showing after upgrading to Dovecot from Courier-IMAP
James Brown wrote: Last night we migrated from Courier-IMAP to Dovecot 1.2RC5 and all seems to work fairly well, but I seem to have lost all my mailboxes apart from INBOX. The maildirs are all on the HD in the correct place (/usr/local/virtual/bordo.com.au/jlbrown): Any idea how to get them back? Subscribe to them; that's all. ~Seth
