[Dovecot] doveadm + dsync merging
doveadm already supports some nice things, such as being able to remotely launch a doveadm command via TCP socket. It also supports executing a command for all users or to some specific users using a wildcard. dsync could use these features, so I merged dsync and doveadm into same binary for v2.1.
I'll still install "dsync" symlink pointing to "doveadm", and running that way it should be fully backwards compatible with the old dsync binary and its parameters.
I'm mainly now wondering about the command naming for running dsync via doveadm. Any suggestions?
a) Use "doveadm dsync" prefix, and otherwise keep the names same:
dsync mirror -> doveadm dsync mirror dsync backup -> doveadm dsync backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync server (for running dsync remotely via ssh/etc.)
b) Don't have the dsync prefix:
dsync mirror -> doveadm mirror dsync backup -> doveadm backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync-server (could be hidden from the doveadm commands list)
c) Either a) or b), but rename "mirror" to "sync" or "dsync" or "replicate"?
d) Something else?
- Timo Sirainen <dovecot@dovecot.org>:
doveadm already supports some nice things, such as being able to remotely launch a doveadm command via TCP socket. It also supports executing a command for all users or to some specific users using a wildcard. dsync could use these features, so I merged dsync and doveadm into same binary for v2.1.
I'll still install "dsync" symlink pointing to "doveadm", and running that way it should be fully backwards compatible with the old dsync binary and its parameters.
I'm mainly now wondering about the command naming for running dsync via doveadm. Any suggestions?
a) Use "doveadm dsync" prefix, and otherwise keep the names same:
dsync mirror -> doveadm dsync mirror dsync backup -> doveadm dsync backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync server (for running dsync remotely via ssh/etc.)
b) Don't have the dsync prefix:
dsync mirror -> doveadm mirror dsync backup -> doveadm backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync-server (could be hidden from the doveadm commands list)
Calling the old "dsync" command (symlink) directly should keep the already established command structure.
Calling dsync features over doveadm should keep command structure as simple (not complex) as possible. I favour b) for that and rename 'mirror' to 'sync'.
'sync' keeps in line with products such as rsync. People will immediately know what it does.
p@rick
-- state of mind ()
Franziskanerstraße 15 Telefon +49 89 3090 4664 81669 München Telefax +49 89 3090 4666
Amtsgericht München Partnerschaftsregister PR 563
On 12/29/2011 01:53 PM Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
- Timo Sirainen <dovecot@dovecot.org>:
… a) Use "doveadm dsync" prefix, and otherwise keep the names same:
dsync mirror -> doveadm dsync mirror dsync backup -> doveadm dsync backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync server (for running dsync remotely via ssh/etc.)
b) Don't have the dsync prefix:
dsync mirror -> doveadm mirror dsync backup -> doveadm backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync-server (could be hidden from the doveadm commands list)
Calling the old "dsync" command (symlink) directly should keep the already established command structure.
Calling dsync features over doveadm should keep command structure as simple (not complex) as possible. I favour b) for that and rename 'mirror' to 'sync'.
'sync' keeps in line with products such as rsync. People will immediately know what it does.
I'd prefer doveadm commands with the dsync prefix. (a)) Because:
- doveadm already has other 'command groups' like mailbox, director …
- that's the way to avoid command clashes (w/o hiding anything)
Renaming 'mirror' to 'sync' could be helpful …
Regards, Pascal
The trapper recommends today: cafebabe.1136315@localdomain.org
On Thu, 2011-12-29 at 15:19 +0100, Pascal Volk wrote:
b) Don't have the dsync prefix:
dsync mirror -> doveadm mirror dsync backup -> doveadm backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync-server (could be hidden from the doveadm commands list)
I did this now, with mirror -> sync.
I'd prefer doveadm commands with the dsync prefix. (a)) Because:
- doveadm already has other 'command groups' like mailbox, director …
- that's the way to avoid command clashes (w/o hiding anything)
There are already many mail related commands that don't have any prefix. For example I think "doveadm import" and "doveadm backup" are quite related. Also "dsync" is perhaps more about the internal implementation, so in future it's possible that sync/backup works some other way..
Hi,
On 12/29/2011 01:35 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
doveadm already supports some nice things, such as being able to remotely launch a doveadm command via TCP socket. It also supports executing a command for all users or to some specific users using a wildcard. dsync could use these features, so I merged dsync and doveadm into same binary for v2.1.
I'll still install "dsync" symlink pointing to "doveadm", and running that way it should be fully backwards compatible with the old dsync binary and its parameters.
I'm mainly now wondering about the command naming for running dsync via doveadm. Any suggestions?
a) Use "doveadm dsync" prefix, and otherwise keep the names same:
dsync mirror -> doveadm dsync mirror dsync backup -> doveadm dsync backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync server (for running dsync remotely via ssh/etc.)
b) Don't have the dsync prefix:
dsync mirror -> doveadm mirror dsync backup -> doveadm backup dsync server -> doveadm dsync-server (could be hidden from the doveadm commands list)
c) Either a) or b), but rename "mirror" to "sync" or "dsync" or "replicate"?
d) Something else?
Slightly different, but it would be good to have a persistently running daemon which could operate both in server and client mode. In server mode it would listen on a TCP socket. In client mode it would accept source and target information via a control socket. The target IP address and port would be the daemon's listening socket.
Something like this on the server side: service dsync { process_limit = 8 client_limit = 8 inet_listener dsync { port = 5555 }
Then doveadm sync on the "client) could first connect to the local server (client), which then connects to the remote service on the server. Eg.: doveadm sync [-C <alt char>] [-m <mailbox>] [-u <user>] [-frRv] mirror <local mail_location> | [<user>@]<host> where user@host should specify the remote user (mailbox user) and host should read like 1.1.1.1:1234 (IP address|hostname and port where the dsync service listens. Or a separate port option to allow easier parsing.
Having the client in a persistent setup would allow faster syncs for repeated invocations. It would be good to have a simple API to trigger the sync (a simple text protocol on a unix socket, or something) from outside programs, to avoid calling doveadm.
The next thing would be to follow dovecot logs and do a sync/async replication. :)
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 08:59:35PM +0100, Attila Nagy wrote:
Slightly different, but it would be good to have a persistently running daemon which could operate both in server and client mode. In server mode it would listen on a TCP socket. In client mode it would accept source and target information via a control socket. The target IP address and port would be the daemon's listening socket.
Great idea!
The next thing would be to follow dovecot logs and do a sync/async replication. :)
It's not too hard to do async already.. If you have last-login tracking in the post-login scripts, you can use this to know which users to trigger async backups for every X minute.
-jf
participants (5)
-
Attila Nagy
-
Jan-Frode Myklebust
-
Pascal Volk
-
Patrick Ben Koetter
-
Timo Sirainen