On 05/22/2021 12:20 AM, Joseph Tam wrote:
You'll note the ratio between then is almost exactly 2. Some utilities
report
space usage in 512-byte block, some in K. I would hazard a guess that
'ls -s'
is reporting in blocks, not K.
No, that is just a coincidence. The actual issue was duplicate
On Thu, 20 May 2021, Eirik Rye wrote:
I noticed that `ls -s` reported a completely different size to `du`, but
similar to what dovecot reports:
# ls -s | head -1
total 14099016
# du
7050436 .
I assume there are some sparseness or block size related shenanigans
going on here instead, causing d
> On 20 May 2021, at 15:18, Eirik Rye wrote:
>
> I assume there are some sparseness or block size related shenanigans going on
> here instead, causing differences in reported physical usage by `du` (syscall
> `newfstatat()`) compared to `ls` (syscall `lstat()`) and dovecot.
>
> The filesyst
> On 20 May 2021, at 14:59, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> Well, next step could be to compare individual mail sizes. It would require
> writing some kind of a script to do the comparison though.
Hello again,
Apologies, I think dovecot is innocent in all of this.
I noticed that `ls -s` reported a
On 20. May 2021, at 14.12, Eirik Rye wrote:
>
>
>> On 20 May 2021, at 13:44, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>
>> You can also look at the folder-level vsizes to see which one is causing the
>> differences (or are they all doubled?)
>
> In this user's case, it is only the Trash-folder that has the wro
> On 20 May 2021, at 13:44, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> You can also look at the folder-level vsizes to see which one is causing the
> differences (or are they all doubled?)
In this user's case, it is only the Trash-folder that has the wrong vsize
calculation:
# doveadm mailbox status -u 'mes
On 20. May 2021, at 13.08, Eirik Rye wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 20 May 2021, at 12:31, Aki Tuomi wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Quota will count only virtual size of mails (and not directories) and that
>> will likely never match with du -bs, which counts for things more than just
>> the mail contents.
>
> On 20 May 2021, at 12:31, Aki Tuomi wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Quota will count only virtual size of mails (and not directories) and that
> will likely never match with du -bs, which counts for things more than just
> the mail contents.
Right, but the quota/vsize of the folder in my example is c
> On 20/05/2021 13:16 Eirik Rye wrote:
>
>
> > On 10 May 2021, at 11:52, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> >
> > S= is the "physical size", W= is the "virtual size". quota=count / vsize
> > calculations should be using the W= value, not the S= value.
>
>
> I renamed all messages containing S= and W
> On 10 May 2021, at 11:52, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> S= is the "physical size", W= is the "virtual size". quota=count / vsize
> calculations should be using the W= value, not the S= value.
I renamed all messages containing S= and W= values in a user's mailbox (Trash)
which had the incorrec
On 5. May 2021, at 15.42, Eirik Rye wrote:
>
> Afterwards, for a couple users, we received reports that mail delivery had
> failed because they were over quota. When looking into it for a specific
> user, we noticed that the vsize reported for a particular folder (with 47k
> messages) was repo
Hello!
Dovecot v2.3.13. Full, but anonymized, `doveconf -n` attached.
We are in the process of migrating maildir-backed users from filesystem quotes,
to using dovecot's "count" quota backend.
This is not reflected in the doveconf output because we're overriding `quota`,
`quota_rule` and `quota
12 matches
Mail list logo
