I've already tortured Timo about that.
check this thread out: http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2012-June/066315.html
-Original Message-
From: dovecot-boun...@dovecot.org [mailto:dovecot-boun...@dovecot.org] On
Behalf Of Aerion Stevens
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 4:50 PM
To: dovecot@
Hi all,
I am interested in running a Dovecot Proxy(with Director) on the same
server as
the main Dovecot IMAP/POP3 service. I have a basic Proxy/Director
configuration working,
however I am struggling with getting the Proxy and IMAP/POP3 service to
coexist on
the same server. I plan to use three I
>>> Oh, and of course it also depends on Dovecot configuration :)
>>> Authentication
>>> cache is needed and login processes must be in high performance mode.
>>
>> I.e., I think:
>>
>> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/LoginProcess
>> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Authentication/Caching
>
> Yes.
>
>
On 22.6.2012, at 5.28, email builder wrote:
>> Oh, and of course it also depends on Dovecot configuration :) Authentication
>> cache is needed and login processes must be in high performance mode.
>
> I.e., I think:
>
> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/LoginProcess
> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Authentica
> Oh, and of course it also depends on Dovecot configuration :) Authentication
> cache is needed and login processes must be in high performance mode.
I.e., I think:
http://wiki2.dovecot.org/LoginProcess
http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Authentication/Caching
> There is
> still the extra work of fork
We've considered using gluster for our mail storage a month ago.
I've seen
index corruption even if mail was delivered by lmtp sequentially
some split-brains with no clear reason
with more than 2000 mails in box we had to wait for 40sec to open mailbox
through roundcube, so
we've decided to go
Hi,
I am trying to st up Offlineimap to use Dovecots LDA to be able to use
Sieve for mail filtering, but am not sure how to get this working. I
think the right way would be to use 'preauthtunnel' in .offlineimaprc
and try the setup below, which doesn't work.
,.offlineimaprc
| [Repository Loca
On 22.6.2012, at 0.58, Michael M Slusarz wrote:
>> I think the conclusion is that imapproxy is not necessary. There are some
>> advantages (eg with high network latency between web and imap server, and
>> reducing apparent login count), and some disadvantages (extra complexity,
>> slowdown)
>
Quoting Ed W :
I think the conclusion is that imapproxy is not necessary. There
are some advantages (eg with high network latency between web and
imap server, and reducing apparent login count), and some
disadvantages (extra complexity, slowdown)
Not entirely true. See this thread:
htt
On 21/06/2012 21:37, René Neumann wrote:
Am 21.06.2012 22:22, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:05 -0700, email builder wrote:
Do you know what webmails are caching vs. non-caching?
Nearly all of them are non-caching. (I don't know of any caching ones.)
At least roundcube (v0.7.
On 21/06/2012 21:54, Reindl Harald wrote:
and last but not least i have lesser entries in maillog which
goes to a central mysql-server for self-developed web-interfaces
I recently added imapproxy to my Roundcube installation. Benchmarks
showed a very slight slowdown, but as you point out it r
Quoting Timo Sirainen :
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:05 -0700, email builder wrote:
Do you know what webmails are caching vs. non-caching?
Nearly all of them are non-caching. (I don't know of any caching ones.)
IMP is caching (message/mailbox/folder listing), with full
QRESYNC/CONDSTORE suppo
On 21.6.2012, at 23.48, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Someone benchmarked Dovecot a while ago in this list with and without
>> imapproxy and the results showed that imapproxy simply slowed things down by
>> adding extra latency. This probably isn't true for all installations, but I
>> don't think the
Am 21.06.2012 22:52, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
> On 21.6.2012, at 23.48, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>>> Someone benchmarked Dovecot a while ago in this list with and without
>>> imapproxy and the results showed that imapproxy simply slowed things down
>>> by adding extra latency. This probably isn't
On 21.6.2012, at 23.48, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> Someone benchmarked Dovecot a while ago in this list with and without
>> imapproxy and the results showed that imapproxy simply slowed things down by
>> adding extra latency. This probably isn't true for all installations, but I
>> don't think the
Am 21.06.2012 22:44, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
> On 21.6.2012, at 23.34, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>> Am 21.06.2012 22:22, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
Do you know what webmails are caching vs. non-caching?
>>>
>>> Nearly all of them are non-caching. (I don't know of any caching ones.)
>>
>> roundcub
On 21.6.2012, at 23.34, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 21.06.2012 22:22, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
>>> Do you know what webmails are caching vs. non-caching?
>>
>> Nearly all of them are non-caching. (I don't know of any caching ones.)
>
> roundcube can if configured
>
> additionally you should insta
On Jun 21, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:05 -0700, email builder wrote:
>> Thank you very much for the fast reply.
>>
We are building a new system that will support a large number of users
>>
(high volume, high concurrent usage, etc). We have play
Am 21.06.2012 22:22, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
> On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:05 -0700, email builder wrote:
>> Do you know what webmails are caching vs. non-caching?
>
> Nearly all of them are non-caching. (I don't know of any caching ones.)
At least roundcube (v0.7.1 here) has some caching options:
Am 21.06.2012 22:22, schrieb Timo Sirainen:
>> Do you know what webmails are caching vs. non-caching?
>
> Nearly all of them are non-caching. (I don't know of any caching ones.)
roundcube can if configured
additionally you should install imapproxy on the webserver
wehre your webmail is runni
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:05 -0700, email builder wrote:
> Thank you very much for the fast reply.
>
> >> We are building a new system that will support a large number of users
>
> >> (high volume, high concurrent usage, etc). We have played with Dovecot,
> >> but in
> >> most serious applica
Thank you very much for the fast reply.
>> We are building a new system that will support a large number of users
>> (high volume, high concurrent usage, etc). We have played with Dovecot, but
>> in
>> most serious applications we have traditionally used Courier IMAP. It's my
>> (lay) unde
We have some scripts that take care of some tasks when creating new email
accounts, such as creating some default mail filter rules.
I know Sieve scripts are plain text files, but need to be compiled for use. I
see that you can use seivec to compile scripts manually, which can help me
create .
On 21.6.2012, at 21.05, email builder wrote:
> We are building a new system that will support a large number of users (high
> volume, high concurrent usage, etc). We have played with Dovecot, but in
> most serious applications we have traditionally used Courier IMAP. It's my
> (lay) understan
Hi,
We are building a new system that will support a large number of users (high
volume, high concurrent usage, etc). We have played with Dovecot, but in most
serious applications we have traditionally used Courier IMAP. It's my (lay)
understanding that with indexing and perhaps other things
Something I noticed on a 2.1.7 director test cluster (two directors,
three backends): 'doveadm proxy kick user' will kick all connections
for that user on that director only. Any additional connections on other
directors will remain active unless the command is run on all directors.
Are the proxy
On 2012-06-21 2:32 AM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
This 'new' type of writing defines mailboxes for SPECIAL-USE as
defined in http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6154.txt.
If your mail clients support it, they will automatically map their
mailboxes for Sent, Junk, Trash, Drafts etc. to whatever mailbox
El 21/06/12 11:53, Timo Sirainen escribió:
Look at the next sentence also: SSL/TLS proxying processes are also counted
here, so if you're using SSL/TLS you'll need to make sure this count is higher
than the maximum number of users that can be logged in simultaneously.
I guess you don't have m
On 21.6.2012, at 11.44, Angel L. Mateo wrote:
> El 20/06/12 12:05, Timo Sirainen escribió:
>>
>>> default_process_limit = 1000
>>
>> Since you haven't enabled high-performance mode for imap-login processes
>> and haven't otherwise changed the service imap-login settings, this
>> means that you c
Hello,
dovecot -n
# 2.0.18: /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf
# OS: Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 x86_64 Debian wheezy/sid
mail_gid = 5000
mail_location = maildir:~:INDEX=/var/mail/indexes/%d/%n
mail_privileged_group = vmail
mail_uid = 5000
namespace {
hidden = no
inbox = yes
list = yes
locati
El 20/06/12 12:05, Timo Sirainen escribió:
default_process_limit = 1000
Since you haven't enabled high-performance mode for imap-login processes
and haven't otherwise changed the service imap-login settings, this
means that you can have max. 1000 simultaneous IMAP SSL/TLS connections.
Am 20.06.2012 17:50, schrieb Romer Ventura:
> Hello,
>
>
>
> Has anyone used GlusterFS as storage file system for dovecot or any other
> email system..?
>
>
>
> It says that it can be presented as a NFS, CIFS and as GlusterFS using the
> native client, technically using the client would all
On 6/20/2012 10:50 AM, Romer Ventura wrote:
> Has anyone used GlusterFS as storage file system for dovecot or any other
> email system?
I have not, but can tell you from experience and education that
distributed filesystems don't work well with transactional workloads
such as IMAP and SMTP. The
33 matches
Mail list logo
