RE: [SLUG] Mail cache

2003-09-25 Thread Peter Hardy
ut it's all > good now!! > > Finally back to some real work! :| > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Peter Hardy > Sent: Wednesday, 24 September 2003 8:15 PM > To: Sydney Linux User Group > Subjec

Re: [SLUG] Mail cache

2003-09-24 Thread Peter Hardy
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 12:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > the logs came from /raid/ssl/. so it's definitely on 'sda1' right? > 4.1G still taken up! weird... > does 'rm' completely remove it? I should think so... it just makes the > i-node free so it's as good as gone right? :( Could be one

Re: [SLUG] Mail cache

2003-09-24 Thread Tony Green
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 12:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Weird... ? > After deleting ALL email records (as per Peter Chubbs' email, and after > downloading a backup to my own machine) I ran those commands and found the > log files 700mb for the largest, next in line not far behind... so I > do

Re: [SLUG] Mail cache

2003-09-24 Thread jazza
Weird... ? After deleting ALL email records (as per Peter Chubbs' email, and after downloading a backup to my own machine) I ran those commands and found the log files 700mb for the largest, next in line not far behind... so I downloaded, as a backup, 'combined_log' and then deleted it . Th

Re: [SLUG] Mail cache

2003-09-24 Thread Tony Green
On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 11:11, James Gray wrote: > What mail server software are you running? Sendmai, Postfix, Qmail > (*cough*, choke), Exim?? I could offer some more specific help if I knew > :) What a great response! Perhaps a possible pearl? -- Tony Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signatur

Re: [SLUG] Mail cache

2003-09-24 Thread James Gray
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:39 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Well - the problems are never-ending here > > Our waterexchange mail server is reporting that it is out of disk space. > > (Outlook message: ) > "The message could not be sent because it rejected you as the sender. > Server Response: '45