From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/86851 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: gallego@cri.ensmp.fr (Emilio =?utf-8?Q?Jes=C3=BAs?= Gallego Arias) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: duplicates with offlineimap+dovecot Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:03:56 +0100 Message-ID: <87twlcvh9v.fsf@cri.ensmp.fr> References: <878u34uyk4.fsf@free.fr> <84bn7q9m9i.fsf@cri.ensmp.fr> <87wpqd5u46.fsf@gnus.org> <87si11nz3m.fsf@cri.ensmp.fr> <87r3glp923.fsf@gnus.org> <87io1wfbvp.fsf@cri.ensmp.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1455372348 1781 80.91.229.3 (13 Feb 2016 14:05:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 14:05:48 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M35073@lists.math.uh.edu Sat Feb 13 15:05:36 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.208]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aUapL-0003pB-Ql for ding-account@gmane.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:05:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1aUao5-0001OY-2z; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 08:04:17 -0600 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1aUao1-0001O1-Hy for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 08:04:13 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1aUanw-000074-JN for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 08:04:13 -0600 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1aUant-0001Dw-7b for ding@gnus.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:04:05 +0100 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aUanr-0002sv-Gy for ding@gnus.org; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:04:03 +0100 Original-Received: from 164.9.67.86.rev.sfr.net ([86.67.9.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:04:03 +0100 Original-Received: from gallego by 164.9.67.86.rev.sfr.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:04:03 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 51 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 164.9.67.86.rev.sfr.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.130016 (Ma Gnus v0.16) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:87KZE8nrEYdeu6dWTnczYzbajxI= X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:86851 Archived-At: Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: >> Yeah so the only idea that came to my mind is if the pipelining of UID >> MOVEs could be causing some problem... > > Pipelining is something that all IMAP servers should handle without too > much problem. After some more research and RFC there seems to be a catch with this, when pipelining and using QRESYNC, mailboxes may get "conceptually out of sync", so some operations may need to be reissued again. Indeed, this problem of duplicates is more common when more moves are issued. >>> * OK [COPYUID 1424475206 4065 96] Moved UIDs. [...] >>> I'm really puzzled by this log, dunno how to interpret it. > > I think that it says "I did everything you asked". So if these messages > remain in the original folder after the server says "Move completed", > then there's something wrong with that server... I'm not sure that is the right interpretation of the log (but my knowlegde of IMAP is very limited), let me restructure the log to remove useless stuff: > *first press of g* > 21:02:59 [domain] 9020 UID MOVE 4063:4064,4067,4069:4072 "folder1" > * OK [COPYUID 1424475231 4063:4064,4067,4069:4072 26:32] Moved UIDs. > * VANISHED 4062,4066,4068:4072 > * 3 RECENT > 9020 OK [HIGHESTMODSEQ 5193] Move completed. I interpret this as "only 4062,4066,4068:4072" got moved. Indeed, then later: > --- Second press of g > 21:07:20 [domain] 9307 UID MOVE 4063:4064,4067 "folder1" > * OK [COPYUID 1424475231 4063:4064,4067 33:35] Moved UIDs. > * VANISHED 4063:4064,4067 > 9307 OK [HIGHESTMODSEQ 5194] Move completed. Precisely the messages that were missing from the previous VANISHED. If my interpretation of the RFC is correct, indeed this is a bug in gnus, as it should parse VANISHED output to confirm the moves. Thanks a lot for the help, best regards, Emilio