Thank you for the merge request, we'll take it into consideration.

@cmouse thanks for the very quick response!

I understand that replicator was quite unstable.

Frankly speaking, my thread where I debug this issue for about 10 months is good explanation why you removed it from 2.4.

But, I have cluster and will to make it stable... may I ask you to consider to put replicator back in 2.4? Or at least restore some API that allows me to build it as a dedicated plugin.

As you can see, I'm quite motivated to make it stable enough to work :)

Yeah. The only problem is that there is no replicator in 2.4. But lets see if we can have this in 2.3

@cmouse because you had removed it at 4c04e4c :)

Maybe recover it when it finally works? For some setups, this feature can be a deal breaker.

@cmouse this code contains a condition:

		if (lookups[i].wait_for_next_push) {
			/* another sync request came while user was being
			   replicated */
			i_assert(user->priority == REPLICATION_PRIORITY_SYNC);
			lookups[i].wait_for_next_push = FALSE;
		}

if I understand the replicator code base right, when timeout is happened it may switch the priority into something else.

So, this abort will be triggered. Probably the right code is something like:

		if (lookups[i].wait_for_next_push) {
			/* another sync request came while user was being
			   replicated */
			if (user->priority != REPLICATION_PRIORITY_SYNC)
				continue;
			lookups[i].wait_for_next_push = FALSE;
		}

BTW I deployed a version with changes from #223 (comment) and I let you posted how it behaves

Well, it survives network issue without any crash:

Sep 25 13:42:20 mx1 dovecot: lmtp([email protected])<74439><nFEoIhL382bHIgEAeeMcAQ>: Warning: replication([email protected]): Sync failure: Timeout in 10 secs

@cmouse after some aditional thought I had simplified this changes to fixing a typo: missed count--. If we delete element, we need to iterate for one element less over array.

@cmouse I continue track an issue where order UID inside vurtual folders are messed up.

Probably the cause of it is... What virtual forlder should be excluded from synchronisation, because otherwise synchronisation fails with hardcoded error: Can't create virtual mailboxes (see: virtual_mailbox_create).

So, here it seems that I don't understand how should it works. With -x virtual. synchronisation works, but it will mess UID inside virtual folders, and without it... it simple fails.

Have I missed something?

After reading https://dovecot.org/mailman3/archives/list/[email protected]/message/5LYQGL2ZOMDDUFUOJU2TUBLLQUWEPZSR/ and near here.... I understand that replicator won't be recoverd.

@cmouse anyway, may I kindly ask you to merge this small typo? With hope that it will be included into the next release of 2.3 branch.

We will consider it, there is no plan for next 2.3 release at the moment.