From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/67329 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Pittman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Questions about nnimap and cyrus->dovecot migration Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2008 17:09:01 +1000 Organization: I know I put it down here, somewhere. Message-ID: <871vzwph4i.fsf@rimspace.net> References: <87r67x48ow.fsf@dod.no> <8763p8puli.fsf@rimspace.net> <878wu44f4x.fsf@dod.no> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1220771913 4328 80.91.229.12 (7 Sep 2008 07:18:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 07:18:33 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M15780@lists.math.uh.edu Sun Sep 07 09:19:28 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KcEYS-0007Mb-45 for ding-account@gmane.org; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:19:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KcEXG-00073U-Oz; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:18:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KcEXF-000737-AT for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:18:13 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KcEXC-0007KI-CA for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:18:13 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1KcEXF-0001LT-00 for ; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:18:13 +0200 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KcEX7-0005jG-4S for ding@gnus.org; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 07:18:05 +0000 Original-Received: from ppp59-167-189-244.static.internode.on.net ([59.167.189.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 07:18:05 +0000 Original-Received: from daniel by ppp59-167-189-244.static.internode.on.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 07 Sep 2008 07:18:05 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 48 Original-Distribution: bofh Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp59-167-189-244.static.internode.on.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:upK377xFRhmcadGD0B9FX3g+8L4= X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:67329 Archived-At: Steinar Bang writes: >>>>>> Daniel Pittman : > >> Technically, imapsync was mentioned there, which I have used and found >> to be uniformly excellent. It preserves all IMAP attributes by virtue >> of working at the IMAP level, which is very effective, and handles >> failure / interruption effectively. > > But it doesn't preserve the UIDs, which means that all the cached > information in Gnus is useless, so that effectively it will be a new > server as seen from Gnus. Well, the cache is useless, but Gnus should handle things like marked messages, etc, just fine. nnimap certainly did when I moved from Cyrus to Zimbra, the later of which does some very kooky things with UID values. So, you /should/ have all your data preserved, and only rebuilding of the cache stuff to worry about. > Hm... preserved flags or a new nnimap server, that's the question, I > guess...? I can't say for sure that the others don't preserve the appropriate details, just that I have had very good experiences with imapsync. > Also, I have some archive folders with more than 30k of messages. I'm > unsure if that will take a very long time. I don't believe there is a significant performance cost to the IMAP parts of imapsync compared to something that ran "in the background" of the servers. It does MD5 all the message content, though, which takes time. > And another also: I planned to install dovecot on the same old server > cyrus has been running. But again: that's probably not worse than > having dovecot run on a non-standard port for a while. *nod* Having to connect via IMAP is also a little awkward, but usually not as dire is it might seem. Anyway, my essential point in this response is: try the other tools, maybe, and see if they work. I can't say that they don't, and you can fall back to imapsync at any stage, really... Regards, Daniel