Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-28 Thread Ken Murchison
Rob Siemborski wrote: However, in Scott's case, he's not renaming the user, he's just moving it between partitions. I don't think we should be iterating across the list to fix the username in this case (so we should fix this ;)... Scott, Try this (untested) patch which I just applied to CVS:

Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-28 Thread Scott Adkins
--On Monday, July 28, 2003 10:26 AM -0400 Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob Siemborski wrote: However, in Scott's case, he's not renaming the user, he's just moving it between partitions. I don't think we should be iterating across the list to fix the username in this case (so we

Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-27 Thread Andrew McNamara
Thanks for the info... I switched over to using flock() and I can confirm that it is now being used instead of fnctl(). The problem is that I still see the same problem as before with regards to over 16500 instances of the following: stat(/var/imap/mailboxes.db, 0x00011FFF9C98) = 0

Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-27 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Andrew McNamara wrote: This sounds like the same problem I complained about on the list in the thread, subject Very slow deletion of user mailboxes?, posted 9th July. I haven't had a chance to investigate further.

Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-24 Thread Scott Adkins
Thanks for the info... I switched over to using flock() and I can confirm that it is now being used instead of fnctl(). The problem is that I still see the same problem as before with regards to over 16500 instances of the following: stat(/var/imap/mailboxes.db, 0x00011FFF9C98) = 0

Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-23 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 17:11:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Rob Siemborski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] No, fcntl is not the default. I'll have to look at the documentation. --with-lock=flock should fix this for you though if it makes a

Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-23 Thread Lawrence Greenfield
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 17:11:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Rob Siemborski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] No, fcntl is not the default. I'll have to look at the documentation. --with-lock=flock should fix this for you though if it makes a difference. Except that it has been since 2.1.7: Change

flock vs fnctl

2003-07-22 Thread Scott Adkins
In version 2.0.16, flock() was being used for file locking. However, in 2.2.1, I am wondering if this is still the case. I looked in the configure output of 2.0.16 and it detects the flock() function call, but in the output of 2.2.1, it doesn't even look like it checks for flock(). Has the

Re: flock vs fnctl

2003-07-22 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Scott Adkins wrote: In version 2.0.16, flock() was being used for file locking. However, in 2.2.1, I am wondering if this is still the case. I looked in the configure output of 2.0.16 and it detects the flock() function call, but in the output of 2.2.1, it doesn't even