> This is where I think the actual user count may really influence this
> behavior. On our system, during heavy times, we can see writes to the
> mailboxes file separated by no more than 5-10 seconds.
>
> If you're constantly freezing all cyrus processes for the duration of
> those writes, and
> So, the problem has nothing to do with IMAP, and everything to do with
> message handling before delivery to the mailbox.
If I've assimilated everything right, I think the summary of the problem is:
Outlook handles some email messages specially (the example Joon has used is
iTIP emails). To a
I'm not sure of you're aware of it, so I'll point it out: you tried
something different from what Ken and I tried. It doesn't explain
everything, but at least some of what you see.
-- Alain Spineux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on 17.
November 2007 00:46:43 +0100 regarding Re:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 06:37:52PM +0100, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
> OK. Still the symptom seems to be different from what I'm seeing.
It may be. As I said I had no time so far to investigate it in depth, I
just wanted to say "mee too" for the hung process problem.
> Could it be that you have a
Hi Rob and all
I have been considering doing this in my environment. From the user
perspective having to launch messages that should be automatically
processed (like read acks and task/appointment updates) confuses them a
little.
I don't know if it is worth it for acks though as this only di
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 11:17:23PM +0100, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
> I haven't yet found what BIO stands for According to Wikipedia it's "an
> abstraction library used by OpenSSL to handle communication of various
> kinds, including files and sockets, both secure and not".
You can think about
Wesley Craig wrote:
> On 16 Nov 2007, at 15:53, Dan White wrote:
>> Nov 16 13:44:57 neo cyrus/imap[6171]: decoding error: generic
>> failure; SASL(-1): generic failure: , closing connection
>
> A fuller version of this error is probably recorded in your auth log.
>
> :wes
Here's from my syslog.c
Wesley Craig wrote:
> If I recall correctly, this is a bad interaction/bug between Cyrus IMAPd
> and Cyrus SASL. I see you're running IMAP 2.3.10. What version of SASL?
>
2.1.22 from Debian etch with a couple of customizations to
ldapdb, which itself it compiled against openldap 2.3.30.
I've
Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
> -- Ken Murchison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on
> 16. November 2007 15:54:50 -0500 regarding Re: One more attempt: stuck
> processes:
>
>> That's exactly what Gary is seeing.
>
> Right. Apparently stripped binaries aren't any good for straces.
>
>
If I recall correctly, this is a bad interaction/bug between Cyrus
IMAPd and Cyrus SASL. I see you're running IMAP 2.3.10. What
version of SASL?
:wes
On 17 Nov 2007, at 10:27, Dan White wrote:
> Nov 17 09:25:02 neo cyrus/imap[11281]: encoded packet size too big
> (4156 > 4096)
Cyrus
Dan White wrote:
> Wesley Craig wrote:
>> If I recall correctly, this is a bad interaction/bug between Cyrus IMAPd
>> and Cyrus SASL. I see you're running IMAP 2.3.10. What version of SASL?
>>
>
> 2.1.22 from Debian etch with a couple of customizations to
> ldapdb, which itself it compiled aga
-- Ken Murchison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on 17.
November 2007 11:21:38 -0500 regarding Re: One more attempt: stuck
processes:
Here's a patch that seems to fix the problem. I did some basic testing
(Linux only) to make sure that it doesn't break anything else, but its
al
-- Gabor Gombas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on 17.
November 2007 14:34:02 +0100 regarding Re: Bingo!:
I'm not sure what to make of that. I would assume that we've got a
blocking BIO, because it is - d'oh - blocking. But I don't see how you
influence what kind of BIO you use
13 matches
Mail list logo
