The Dovecot wiki [1] doesn't list either Exim, Postfix or anything else as supporting the dbox. I did some searching in the Exim archives and have found only one message mentioning dbox, sdbox or mdbox. [2] I think an RFC would go a long way towards getting the format supported. Has Timo, or anyone else, considered submitting an RFC to the IETF?
My question was how are we going to use it if Exim doesn't support it. It looks like we can filter it and convert it with dovecot-lda. [3] I have generally avoided using Procmail for a few years because of various problems and it's a dead software project that hasn't been developed in what 15 to 20 years. I am thinking about trying it with Exim's built in Maildrop filtering support. Has anybody tried that? What else are people using to enable dbox?
The more specific question on the problem I am trying to solve. I have been using mbox for years, and I can't even get Dovecot, IMAP and Thunderbird working on the LAN because it can't handle the GB's of old mail. Mutt works on the local machine, but I want something that works while I am using something other than ssh and mutt. For example I want to try Mailpile and K9. I would like to try dbox, but given it's lack of support in Exim or Postfix, I'll probably convert to maildir.
Thanks, Chuck
Hi Chuck,
I’m really curious as to if I really understand you correctly. Neither Exim nor Postfix do need to support any mailbox format. They both should hand incoming mail to either LDA or LMTP. You can use sieve and managesieve for filtering and there even is a Thunderbird plugin for managing the filters. So all in all it should be pretty convenient. I don't see why dovecot should not be able to handle multiple GBs of mail, even on a local network.
Philon
You might want to check here: http://wiki2.dovecot.org/LDA/Exim http://wiki2.dovecot.org/LMTP/Exim
2014-10-09 14:20 GMT+02:00 C Peters chuck.peters@gmail.com:
The Dovecot wiki [1] doesn't list either Exim, Postfix or anything else as supporting the dbox. I did some searching in the Exim archives and have found only one message mentioning dbox, sdbox or mdbox. [2] I think an RFC would go a long way towards getting the format supported. Has Timo, or anyone else, considered submitting an RFC to the IETF?
My question was how are we going to use it if Exim doesn't support it. It looks like we can filter it and convert it with dovecot-lda. [3] I have generally avoided using Procmail for a few years because of various problems and it's a dead software project that hasn't been developed in what 15 to 20 years. I am thinking about trying it with Exim's built in Maildrop filtering support. Has anybody tried that? What else are people using to enable dbox?
The more specific question on the problem I am trying to solve. I have been using mbox for years, and I can't even get Dovecot, IMAP and Thunderbird working on the LAN because it can't handle the GB's of old mail. Mutt works on the local machine, but I want something that works while I am using something other than ssh and mutt. For example I want to try Mailpile and K9. I would like to try dbox, but given it's lack of support in Exim or Postfix, I'll probably convert to maildir.
Thanks, Chuck
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 06:03:57PM +0200, Philon wrote:
I’m really curious as to if I really understand you correctly. Neither Exim nor Postfix do need to support any mailbox format. They both should hand incoming mail to either LDA or LMTP.
Postfix has an LDA (local(8)). I believe Exim also has a builtin LDA.
local(8) - Postfix local mail delivery
Postfix's LDA can write to both Maildir and mbox mailboxes.
Of course, both MTAs let you specify an external LDA, but both do have builtin ones.
w
On October 9, 2014 2:20:14 PM C Peters chuck.peters@gmail.com wrote:
it's lack of support in Exim or Postfix, I'll probably convert to maildir.
Why not use dovecot lmtp or dovecot lda ?, postfix or exim dont need to store mails in sql like dbmail does, but dbmail have a lda or lmtp aswell, problem solved no ?
On 09 Oct 2014, at 15:20, C Peters chuck.peters@gmail.com wrote:
The Dovecot wiki [1] doesn't list either Exim, Postfix or anything else as supporting the dbox. I did some searching in the Exim archives and have found only one message mentioning dbox, sdbox or mdbox. [2] I think an RFC would go a long way towards getting the format supported. Has Timo, or anyone else, considered submitting an RFC to the IETF?
No, and I don't want it to happen anytime in near future. The dbox format is highly Dovecot-specific, because it relies on Dovecot's index files. These index files are still changing and I'm not sure if they will ever be fully finished. I don't want any other software to even attempt to implement the same functionality.
My question was how are we going to use it if Exim doesn't support it.
As others said, use LMTP or dovecot-lda with Sieve filtering.
On 09/10/14 23:06, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 09 Oct 2014, at 15:20, C Peters chuck.peters@gmail.com wrote:
The Dovecot wiki [1] doesn't list either Exim, Postfix or anything else as supporting the dbox. I did some searching in the Exim archives and have found only one message mentioning dbox, sdbox or mdbox. [2] I think an RFC would go a long way towards getting the format supported. Has Timo, or anyone else, considered submitting an RFC to the IETF?
No, and I don't want it to happen anytime in near future. The dbox format is highly Dovecot-specific, because it relies on Dovecot's index files. These index files are still changing and I'm not sure if they will ever be fully finished. I don't want any other software to even attempt to implement the same functionality.
My question was how are we going to use it if Exim doesn't support it.
As others said, use LMTP or dovecot-lda with Sieve filtering.
Hi,
I am sorry if I am presumptuous or out of topic, but it seems to me that the mail storage should be standardised.
I am still using Maildir myself, simply because I like the simplicity, one file is one email, one directory is one email folder, for backup or restore.
The only thing I don't like is the naming convention, but I don't know if a file system exists today to store such information in label or tags associated to each file.
Regarding the optimisation, I think it's the file system's role, albeit I appreciate Dovecot's efforts to optimise the storage by taking in consideration file system's specificities.
A feature I would like, is dovecot being able to store emails in databases, SQL or NoSQL. I would use this for archiving and queries purposes. MariaDB / Drizzle, or MongoDB, CouchDB, etc. There is plenty of choice.
Maybe this storage scheme would be slower, but IMHO, this is not a problem when people just want to archive their emails on a remote computer.
Maybe I could start this if I had some template or example to start.
Kind regards, André.
Am 10.10.2014 um 09:53 schrieb Andre Rodier:
On 09/10/14 23:06, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 09 Oct 2014, at 15:20, C Peters chuck.peters@gmail.com wrote:
The Dovecot wiki [1] doesn't list either Exim, Postfix or anything else as supporting the dbox. I did some searching in the Exim archives and have found only one message mentioning dbox, sdbox or mdbox. [2] I think an RFC would go a long way towards getting the format supported. Has Timo, or anyone else, considered submitting an RFC to the IETF?
No, and I don't want it to happen anytime in near future. The dbox format is highly Dovecot-specific, because it relies on Dovecot's index files. These index files are still changing and I'm not sure if they will ever be fully finished. I don't want any other software to even attempt to implement the same functionality.
My question was how are we going to use it if Exim doesn't support it.
As others said, use LMTP or dovecot-lda with Sieve filtering.
Hi,
I am sorry if I am presumptuous or out of topic, but it seems to me that the mail storage should be standardised.
Not really, its good to have many options
I am still using Maildir myself, simply because I like the simplicity, one file is one email, one directory is one email folder, for backup or restore.
The only thing I don't like is the naming convention, but I don't know if a file system exists today to store such information in label or tags associated to each file.
Regarding the optimisation, I think it's the file system's role, albeit I appreciate Dovecot's efforts to optimise the storage by taking in consideration file system's specificities.
A feature I would like, is dovecot being able to store emails in databases, SQL or NoSQL. I would use this for archiving and queries purposes. MariaDB / Drizzle, or MongoDB, CouchDB, etc. There is plenty of choice.
agreed, its good to have more options
Maybe this storage scheme would be slower, but IMHO, this is not a problem when people just want to archive their emails on a remote computer.
why not using bcc stuff with i.e postfix
perhaps see
https://sys4.de/de/blog/2013/02/07/mailarchiv-mit-dovecot-und-postfix-sortie...
sorry german
Maybe I could start this if I had some template or example to start.
Kind regards, André.
Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer
-- [*] sys4 AG
http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
On October 10, 2014 10:10:55 AM Robert Schetterer rs@sys4.de wrote:
sorry german
Why sorry ?, its more sad to see it repeated
Men måske skulle jeg bare skrive blåbærgrød ? :)
Am 10.10.2014 um 15:38 schrieb Benny Pedersen:
On October 10, 2014 10:10:55 AM Robert Schetterer rs@sys4.de wrote:
sorry german
Why sorry ?, its more sad to see it repeated
Men måske skulle jeg bare skrive blåbærgrød ? :)
jIyajbe'
Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer
-- [*] sys4 AG
http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
On 10 Oct 2014, at 00:53, Andre Rodier andre@rodier.me wrote:
On 09/10/14 23:06, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On 09 Oct 2014, at 15:20, C Peters chuck.peters@gmail.com wrote:
The Dovecot wiki [1] doesn't list either Exim, Postfix or anything else as supporting the dbox. I did some searching in the Exim archives and have found only one message mentioning dbox, sdbox or mdbox. [2] I think an RFC would go a long way towards getting the format supported. Has Timo, or anyone else, considered submitting an RFC to the IETF?
No, and I don't want it to happen anytime in near future. The dbox format is highly Dovecot-specific, because it relies on Dovecot's index files. These index files are still changing and I'm not sure if they will ever be fully finished. I don't want any other software to even attempt to implement the same functionality.
I am sorry if I am presumptuous or out of topic, but it seems to me that the mail storage should be standardised.
I am still using Maildir myself, simply because I like the simplicity, one file is one email, one directory is one email folder, for backup or restore.
Sure, mbox and Maildir are pretty standard. And Maildir is especially good if you care about reliability more than performance. But dbox was especially designed for performance - trying to standardize it in any way would limit the ability to improve its performance in future. So dbox isn't really meant for people who want to use any kind of a standard, it's for people who want as good performance from Dovecot as possible.
A feature I would like, is dovecot being able to store emails in databases, SQL or NoSQL. I would use this for archiving and queries purposes. MariaDB / Drizzle, or MongoDB, CouchDB, etc. There is plenty of choice.
Dovecot's (commercial) object storage plugin could probably be used with NoSQL servers. We've been looking into Cassandra support at least.
Maybe this storage scheme would be slower, but IMHO, this is not a problem when people just want to archive their emails on a remote computer.
Maybe I could start this if I had some template or example to start.
There's a very old SQL storage plugin for Dovecot. It would require a lot of work though:
http://dovecot.org/patches/mail-sql.patch http://dovecot.org/patches/mail-sql.tar.gz
There is actually also a working read-only SQL storage plugin that supports only INBOX. I could send the sources for that as well.
participants (7)
-
Andre Rodier
-
Benny Pedersen
-
C Peters
-
Philon
-
Robert Schetterer
-
Timo Sirainen
-
Will Yardley