On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 12:06 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 3.4.2007, at 21.05, Paul Hamby wrote:
We are running 1.0.rc28 on three servers with 3 Horde/IMP boxes
talking to Dovecot. The user's home dirs are located on an NFS server and the indexes are stored in their Maildirs. I have mmap_disable=yes and lock_method=dotlock in dovecot.conf. We have not implemented anything to direct users to the same server as is recommended per the Wiki. I have been trying to avoid this, as the best way I could see to do it would be to put in an IMAP proxy (Perdition?) and I just wanted to keep it as simple as possible if I could.And I guess you didn't disable attribute cache either?
I was concerned about the performance hit it would take doing this. I will set actimeo=0 on the nfs mounts and monitor the logs for errors to see if this helps while not killing performance.
current sync_offset (23368) Apr 3 08:37:51 app02 dovecot: IMAP(user): file mail-index-sync-update.c: line 40 (mail_index_sync_update_log_offset): assertion failed: (prev_offset >= map->hdr.log_file_int_offset ||
The problems we have been having are due to dovecot.*.lock files not being cleaned up. This issue presents itself as a user not being
able to login via the webmail interface. The logfile will contain something similar to the following: .. Apr 3 08:37:51 app02 dovecot: IMAP(user): Corrupted transaction log file /mail_home3/j/ji/user/Maildir/dovecot.index.log: end_offset
(23440) prev_seq > map->hdr.log_file_seq)Hmm. I guess I should change this assert to instead just log an error
and return failure, because it's what leaves the lock files lying
around.
Will this change be in an upcoming RC?
But anyway I don't think it's a good idea to keep using this kind of
a configuration where things break all the time..
Understood, there are just some added complexities to consider in the IMAP proxy scenario, such as the changes needed for adding, editing and deleting user accounts and the necessary changes to our LDAP config. It is something I will have to give more thought/time to.
Thanks for your reply.
Paul