On 2011-10-19 22:35, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> rsync -H will also work, but it can be painful. YMMV.
Unfortunately rsync is not an option since I need to XFER the mailboxes to
do the 2.3=>2.4 index upgrades. That's the only way to do it without long
downtime on a backend that large.
Gr
On 2011-10-19 17:42, Simon Matter wrote:
> I think for the singleinstancestore, you can redo it after migration with
> tools like hardlink or http://www.freedup.org/. IIRC I did this once and
> it worked fine - I think I was using a simple bash script as you suggested
> above. The only problem coul
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Simon Matter wrote:
> I think for the singleinstancestore, you can redo it after migration with
> tools like hardlink or http://www.freedup.org/. IIRC I did this once and
Indeed you can. AFAIK, once Cyrus IMAP commits a message to disk, its
backing file is not changed, just u
> Ramprasad wrote, on 19.10.2011 15:37:
>> I think , writing a standalone index upgrade utility , like the ipurge ,
>> seems to be a reasonable thing to do
>>
>>
>> If there was a light enough index upgrade possible ( only for inboxes ..
>> not subfolders ) Then I could stop cyrus , fork probably a
Ramprasad wrote, on 19.10.2011 15:37:
> I think , writing a standalone index upgrade utility , like the ipurge ,
> seems to be a reasonable thing to do
>
>
> If there was a light enough index upgrade possible ( only for inboxes ..
> not subfolders ) Then I could stop cyrus , fork probably around
On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 13:38 +0200, Wolfgang Breyha wrote:
> Bron Gondwana wrote, on 19.10.2011 12:27:
> > On Wednesday, October 19, 2011 12:18 PM, "Wolfgang Breyha"
> > wrote:
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> Is singleinstancestore obsolete/useless in 2.4.(12)?
> >>
> >> This option is read into "singleinsta
Bron Gondwana wrote, on 19.10.2011 12:27:
> On Wednesday, October 19, 2011 12:18 PM, "Wolfgang Breyha"
> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> Is singleinstancestore obsolete/useless in 2.4.(12)?
>>
>> This option is read into "singleinstance" in lmtpd.c and nntpd.c, but never
>> used afterwards? Or did I miss s
On Wednesday, October 19, 2011 12:18 PM, "Wolfgang Breyha"
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Is singleinstancestore obsolete/useless in 2.4.(12)?
>
> This option is read into "singleinstance" in lmtpd.c and nntpd.c, but never
> used afterwards? Or did I miss something searching the source?
Hmm...
r
> I need a sanity check here.
>
> I had a single storage partition that I've grown to ~400GB to house
> about 270,000 mailboxes. I managed to reduce that number by around
> 115,000 by purging out accounts no one's logged into, still leaving
> quite a mess of accounts. I've been migrating them wit
I need a sanity check here.
I had a single storage partition that I've grown to ~400GB to house
about 270,000 mailboxes. I managed to reduce that number by around
115,000 by purging out accounts no one's logged into, still leaving
quite a mess of accounts. I've been migrating them with some perl
Simon
Thanks for the info.
I'll try again after I switch to ldap based virtual aliases.
John
Simon Matter wrote:
Made some progress, seems it's more of a postfix issue but have not had
any luck on the postfix newsgroup :(
This is what I have tried:
local_transport = lmtp:unix:/var/run/cyru
> Made some progress, seems it's more of a postfix issue but have not had
> any luck on the postfix newsgroup :(
>
> This is what I have tried:
>
> local_transport = lmtp:unix:/var/run/cyrus/socket/lmtp
> virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual
>
> tried in /etc/postfix/virtual:
>
> test1
Made some progress, seems it's more of a postfix issue but have not had
any luck on the postfix newsgroup :(
This is what I have tried:
local_transport = lmtp:unix:/var/run/cyrus/socket/lmtp
virtual_alias_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/virtual
tried in /etc/postfix/virtual:
test1:inclu
Okay, unfortunately we have to stick with procmail as sieve is
not up to the task of some of the complex filtering we do.
--
---
Paul Rainesemail: raines at nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
MGH/MIT/HMS Athinoula A. Martinos Center for
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Paul Raines wrote:
How does singleinstancestore figure out messages that can be
hard linked? It doesn't seem to do it by message-id across mailboxes.
If I send email to a mailman list with all my users, that mail
goes into their mailboxes individually (not hard linked as a
15 matches
Mail list logo
