On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 09:17, Ilja Booij wrote:
On Wednesday, Oct 15, 2003, at 14:57 Europe/Amsterdam, Chris Mason
wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm using dbmail 1.2 from cvs (Oct 12), and also reproduced on
2.0-alpha1. I'm delivering to dbmail-smtp through procmail.
When I use
On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 09:39, Chris Mason wrote:
[ empty messages in database ]
This happens to about 1 out of 20 of the messages.
Does this sound like a known issue?
Does not sound famaliar to me..
If it's both in dbmail 1.2 and 2.0 it's probably some old bug.
could you please add
Chris Mason wrote:
It seems to have something to do with procmail, I can't reproduce when
inserting the messages manually. Looking harder...
I noticed that you insert messages via dbmail-smtp -m mailbox -u mason,
I've got approx 20 users using procmail to insert their mail with
dbmail-smtp,
On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 09:55, Matt Dickinson wrote:
Chris Mason wrote:
It seems to have something to do with procmail, I can't reproduce when
inserting the messages manually. Looking harder...
I noticed that you insert messages via dbmail-smtp -m mailbox -u mason,
I've got approx 20
Chris Mason wrote:
procmail can do much of this for you, when the dbmail-smtp fails it
falls back to deliver into the default spool file. This gives you
/var/spool/mail/$user
When the database comes back up, run formail -s procmail
/var/spool/mail/$user as each user and things will get
On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 10:19, Matt Dickinson wrote:
Chris Mason wrote:
procmail can do much of this for you, when the dbmail-smtp fails it
falls back to deliver into the default spool file. This gives you
/var/spool/mail/$user
When the database comes back up, run formail -s procmail
Ilja: fix the tables for PostgreSQL perhaps ?
That would be nice. :-
I apologize for the lack of specificity in the note. I simply
cut-and-pasted the PostgreSQL kindly supplied in the reply into a psql
session and it worked. I don't know enough about DBMail to be of much
help ... yet.
Ted
The database update script can now (not a the time you, Mikael, wrote
your message) be found in the sql/ directory in the DBMail 2.0 sources.
Ilja
On Friday, Oct 10, 2003, at 15:56 Europe/Amsterdam, Mikael Syska wrote:
Will it be very hard to make it just copy from 1.1 to 1.1 or will the
Ilja Booij wrote:
The tables are fixed in CVS. For people using the DBMail 1.2 release: I've
put Paul's SQL-script on http://www.dbmail.org so you can download it, and
run it against your PostgreSQL DBMail database.
This update script can also be found in the sql/postgresql/ directory in
the
Hello all!
I use Exim 4.24+Dbmail1.1+Mysql+Drweb!
If my client use auth_plain - system work properly (all ok!)
But if use auth_login - in maillog file i see:
Oct 15 18:13:43 myserver exim[46663]: [1\2] 2003-10-15 18:13:43
auth_login authenticator failed for (programmer) [212.5.102.96]: 435
Unable
On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 09:37, Patrick Giagnocavo +1.717.201.3366 wrote:
I think that (depending on PG version) adding a primary key will
create a unique index on that field. A primary key has to be unique,
so creating a unique index enforces that requirement.
It is, when you make a column a
On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 09:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all!
I use Exim 4.24+Dbmail1.1+Mysql+Drweb!
If my client use auth_plain - system work properly (all ok!)
But if use auth_login - in maillog file i see:
Oct 15 18:13:43 myserver exim[46663]: [1\2] 2003-10-15 18:13:43
auth_login
On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 09:25, Paul J Stevens wrote:
Caveat: I'm no sql guru.
Rule of thumb: all fields used in where clauses should be indexed.
Not exactly true... Every time you create an index it slows down
inserts and updates (again something that will be helped with the new
phy_message
1) It would be nice to provide multiple index sets - most of
the ones that have been posted are good for imap, but almost
entireley extra overhead if you just use pop3. We've improved
our pop3 performance by removing most of them and perhaps
optimizing a couple (or they may be
From: Jesse Norell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Having said that, I think it was dbmail-smtp performance we
improved by removing those indexes (ie. because the database doesn't
have as many indexes to maintain). I think we did do some optimizing
for pop3 too, though, but I don't know that it (ie.
From: Jesse Norell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Having said that, I think it was dbmail-smtp performance we
improved by removing those indexes (ie. because the database doesn't
have as many indexes to maintain). I think we did do some optimizing
for pop3 too, though, but I don't know that it (ie.
17 matches
Mail list logo
