[apologies for top-posting. Those who want to know what this solution is about, read below my top-post.] Final: Counting is fine now. The true count is being show in all cases and regardless of how deep my nested folders go. A thanks to Tomas for your help! Karl ---------------------- On Sat, March 20, 2010 9:34 am, Karl Pearson wrote: > > > > On Thu, March 18, 2010 11:16 am, Tomas Kuliavas wrote: >> >> >> Karl Pearson wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, March 18, 2010 2:58 am, Tomas Kuliavas wrote: >>>> Karl Pearson wrote: >>>>> On Wed, March 17, 2010 1:55 pm, Tomas Kuliavas wrote: >>>>>> Karl Pearson wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've emailed a couple times, with the most recent just a week or so >>>>>>> ago about Squirrelmail not reporting the correct number of emails >>>>>>> left unread in all my folders. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I solved it by un-checking this option under Folders: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Enable Cumulative Unread Message Notification: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess I don't know what that means, so clicked it years ago when >>>>>>> I first started using SQM. Anyone want to fill my brain up with >>>>>>> knowledge? It's pretty much empty right now, which is obvious to >>>>>>> most. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I though that you talked about invalid count reported by newmail >>>>>> plugin. Left listing counts are different. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you have some folders that have similar names? Could you check >>>>>> which folders report invalid unread/total counts or make a >>>>>> spreadsheet with folder names, unread/total counts reported by IMAP >>>>>> STATUS and unread/total counts reported on left folder listing? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cumulative count should increase unread/total email counters, if >>>>>> folder has collapsed subfolders and those subfolders have unread >>>>>> emails. I suspect that counter can be incorrectly increased, if >>>>>> folder has collapsed subfolders and there are similar folders. >>>>> >>>>> Unchecking the Cumluative setting didn't solve it after all, so I'm >>>>> seeing the count creep up after just a couple days. >>>>> >>>>> I've been using IMAP-based email solutions on my own email server for >>>>> over 15 years, and a cursory check (ls -R|wc -l) shows I have 8540 >>>>> separate folders (lines; some aren't folders). I've found 15 >>>>> duplicate >>>>> names, so am going through and either combining them, or renaming >>>>> them, >>>>> whichever is appropriate. >>>>> >>>>> If renaming some of the folders (none of the duplicates were in the >>>>> same location) doesn't solve it, I'm wondering if a buffer overrun >>>>> might be the problem with that many folders. >>>>> >>>>> I wrote a script some time ago that goes through a folder (from the >>>>> commandline) and marks all messages as having been opened (Read). I >>>>> do >>>>> that on older folders because I suspected at the time of writing it >>>>> that Alpine and Squirrelmail were 'fighting' over how to actually >>>>> mark >>>>> a message as having been read. From what I'm learning, that's a >>>>> function of Dovecot, right? The email client sends an IMAP command >>>>> and >>>>> Dovecot marks the message as opened/read, right? >>>>> >>>>> But I still have the question as why using the Squirrelmail 'Search' >>>>> feature would cause the unread count to be reset to 0 (even when >>>>> there >>>>> are some unread emails). >>>>> >>>>> I'm running the MarkEmailRead.sh script against some folders and it >>>>> takes some time, so I think I'll head to bed and let it finish... >>>>> >>>> Which counters are increasing? You have lots of folders, but you still >>>> notice increased counts. SquirrelMail has mini plugin, which can show >>>> only folders with unread emails. >>> >>> The only count that's inaccurate is the one that generates the >>> <title>NN New Messages</title> >>> tag that displays in the Firefox Tab and the Window's Caption. There >>> are >>> no message count plugins. >>> >> >> Could you go to SquirrelMail Options -> NewMail Options and make sure >> that >> "Count only messages that are RECENT:" option is not checked. > > Aha! That was checked. Thanks! I'll keep watching. I perhaps should verify > with a couple other users that these options are already unchecked, seeing > they don't have this issue as I do. That option being checked makes me > understand why I might be seeing some of the anomalies (if only in my > mind) I'm seeing. > > Thanks Tomas. > >> >> -- >> Tomas >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://old.nabble.com/Message-Count-Update-%28Solution-Bug%29-tp27936550p27948661.html >> Sent from the squirrelmail-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ----- squirrelmail-users mailing list Posting guidelines: http://squirrelmail.org/postingguidelines List address: squirrelmail-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx List archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.squirrelmail.user List info (subscribe/unsubscribe/change options): https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users
