-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
Yes, I'm trying to make some backup solution.
The idea was to have two identical (well, nearly identical) servers with the
same software and data on them, and while the first do its job as SMTP and
P
So I'd better wait for dsync? Or I can get it (without iterate code) now
somehow?
11.01.2010 16:54, Timo Sirainen пишет:
On 11.1.2010, at 16.46, Mario Antonio wrote:
With v2.0 dsync would be great for this..
How could dsync beat rsync?
With just one rsync command you can replicate the whole
v2.0 is still in beta. I should release second beta sometimes soon, but I'm a
bit too busy / internetless currently. I'm anyway using the latest hg for my
own mails, so it's not completely broken, but I wouldn't necessarily recomment
it for larger installations..
On 11.1.2010, at 16.45, Alexand
On 11.1.2010, at 16.46, Mario Antonio wrote:
>> With v2.0 dsync would be great for this..
>
> How could dsync beat rsync?
> With just one rsync command you can replicate the whole mail store (a root
> folder)
> Can you do the same with Dsync? or Do you have to write a script that feeds
> Domai
Timo,
I'd really love to but I'm really not sure in my code skills to patch
such a sw as Dovecot.
11.01.2010 16:42, Timo Sirainen пишет:
On 11.1.2010, at 16.41, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
In fact I just try to understand if Dovecot's behaviour is right and my
expectations are wrong, or vis
No of course it won't. But dsync seems to be a solution that won't deal
with storage level so it will resolve conflicts easily.
Personally I prefer rsync :)
How could dsync beat rsync?
With just one rsync command you can replicate the whole mail store (a
root folder)
Can you do the same with D
On 1/11/2010 9:34 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 11.1.2010, at 16.06, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
Doing this using imapsync won't work. It is slow (hours vs minutes with rsync)
so I can't run it every 5 minutes, and, moreover, it crashes on some messages,
so can not rely on it in production.
I'd love to use it (it's going to be magic solution for me).
But no I haven't looked at v2 yet. Is dsync is ready to use now or this
is just an alpha/beta concept code?
11.01.2010 16:34, Timo Sirainen пишет:
On 11.1.2010, at 16.06, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
Doing this using imapsync won't w
On 11.1.2010, at 16.41, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
> In fact I just try to understand if Dovecot's behaviour is right and my
> expectations are wrong, or vise versa. I mean when server see two identical
> messages (files) both in cur and in new dirs it can compare these files not
> only by name
In fact I just try to understand if Dovecot's behaviour is right and my
expectations are wrong, or vise versa. I mean when server see two
identical messages (files) both in cur and in new dirs it can compare
these files not only by name and rename if these names are the same, but
maybe check c
I see the only option I have is to use filesystem sync and not rsync.
Frankly I'd rather use rsync and not play with GEOM (I'm on FreeBSD) on
servers right now.
The problem as I've said is not sync itself but rather Dovecot's way of
treating files. You can test it yourself: go to your our cur/
On 11.1.2010, at 16.06, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
> Doing this using imapsync won't work. It is slow (hours vs minutes with
> rsync) so I can't run it every 5 minutes, and, moreover, it crashes on some
> messages, so can not rely on it in production.
With v2.0 dsync would be great for this..
Hi,
The idea was to have two identical (well, nearly identical) servers with
the same software and data on them, and while the first do its job as
SMTP and POP3/IMAP4 server, the second server just get copy of first's
current state (that is, copy user db and mail spool). In case of
something wro
Hi,
This is a general backup issue (files changing during backup run) and
nothing Dovecot specific. You should look into something that gives you
a consistent view of the data, f.i. LVM snapshots (when you're running
linux).
Regards,
Tom
Alexander Chekalin wrote:
> Yes, I'm trying to mak
Yes, I'm trying to make some backup solution.
The idea was to have two identical (well, nearly identical) servers with
the same software and data on them, and while the first do its job as
SMTP and POP3/IMAP4 server, the second server just get copy of first's
current state (that is, copy user
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 02:18:07PM +0200, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
> Oh, I finally find out the problem. If Dovecot see in the IMAP mailbox
> two message files named equally (say in cur/ and new/ dirs) it renames
> one of them into new name dispute this is the same message.
>
> I'm not sure if th
On 2010-01-11, Alexander Chekalin (acheka...@lazurit.com) wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is intended behaviour. It is quite easy to see
> such situation when doing periodical rsync (SMTP put message to new/
> dir, then rsync copy it to second server, then message on the first
> server move to cur/,
Oh, I finally find out the problem. If Dovecot see in the IMAP mailbox
two message files named equally (say in cur/ and new/ dirs) it renames
one of them into new name dispute this is the same message.
I'm not sure if this is intended behaviour. It is quite easy to see such
situation when doin
On 4.1.2010, at 15.32, Alexander Chekalin wrote:
> The problem is that files in Maildirs on First server are named like that:
>
> 1262610335.H798006P5447.first.domain.my,S=1962:2,
> 1262610402.H529761P5596.first.domain.my,S=2975:2,
> 1262610410.H787724P5657.first.domain.my,S=75691:2,
> ...
>
> a
Hi,
I'm really fuzzy about some problem on how Dovecot used to name files to
store messages in Maildir.
I have two identical servers (let's call them "First" and "Second"), and
have Dovecot and Exim set up on both of them (Maildirs are used to store
messages and boxes). First server is the s
20 matches
Mail list logo
