Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: conversations a bit broken?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default conversations a bit broken?

    i installed zimbra on FC4 and pumped about a GB of mail into it with imapsync.

    everything seems to be working, except that conversations often seem to include completely unrelated messages.

    is this a known problem? any fixes?

    regards, John

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    274
    Rep Power
    10

    Default elaborate please

    can you give us some examples?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anand
    can you give us some examples?
    sure - mail headers below (with obfuscated email addresses)

    the first header is from the final in an exchange between myself and zzzzzzz@connect.com.fj. you can see the References: header - all the message in the conversation show up.

    the conversation also includes an unrelated message - see the second header.

    any ideas?



    Return-Path: <zzzzzzz@connect.com.fj>
    Delivered-To: xxxxxx@espresso.integrated-mapping.com
    Received: from meme.inmap.co.nz (unknown [202.27.110.12])
    by espresso.integrated-mapping.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC31A1DC048
    for <xxxxxx@espresso>; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 23:19:38 -0400 (EDT)
    Received: from mx.inmap.co.nz (mx.inmap.co.nz [202.27.110.240])
    by meme.inmap.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA27763
    for <xxxxxx@inmap.co.nz>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 03:19:40 GMT
    Received: from homer.is.com.fj (homer.is.com.fj [202.62.124.238])
    by mx.inmap.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3A5C73C
    for <xxxxxx@integrated-mapping.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 03:19:36 +0000 (UTC)
    Received: from NEWNOTEBOOK (luts5300-dialup1.is.com.fj [202.62.121.17])
    by homer.is.com.fj (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g9H3JL5a033056
    for <xxxxxx@integrated-mapping.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2002 15:19:28 +1200 (FJT)
    Message-ID: <003f01c2758c$01745e70$057a3eca@NEWNOTEBOOK>
    From: "zzzzzzz" <zzzzzzz@connect.com.fj>
    To: "xxxxxx McCombs" <xxxxxx@integrated-mapping.com>
    References: <f02101018074785DF@local> <3DA74950.8000006@integrated-mapping.com>
    <000f01c2725f$b9f95520$3f7a3eca@NEWNOTEBOOK> <3DA8F107.1040808@integrated-mapping.com>
    <002f01c2728b$6eb1c580$207a3eca@NEWNOTEBOOK> <3DAA31FA.6000203@integrated-mapping.com>
    <021901c27342$d43c69c0$1b793eca@NEWNOTEBOOK> <3DADE2D3.2090004@integrated-mapping.com>
    <002601c2756d$9bd77930$0f7a3eca@NEWNOTEBOOK> <3DAE06B7.1000400@integrated-mapping.com>
    Subject: Re: network
    Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 16:16:01 +1300
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    Content-Type: text/plain;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000


    ------------------------------
    Return-Path: <yyyyyyy@yyy.com>
    Delivered-To: xxxxxx@integrated-mapping.com
    Received: from incognito.integrated-mapping.com (unknown [202.27.110.240])
    by espresso.integrated-mapping.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E00151DC048
    for <xxxxxx@espresso.integrated-mapping.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:30:37 +1300 (NZDT)
    Received: from grunt6.ihug.co.nz (grunt6.ihug.co.nz [203.109.254.46])
    by incognito.integrated-mapping.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA622D341D
    for <xxxxxx@inmap.co.nz>; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:30:36 +1300 (NZDT)
    Received: from 166-179-19-48.jamamobile.co.nz (eowyn.yyy.com) [166.179.19.48]
    by grunt6.ihug.co.nz with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
    id 1EPPpZ-0004KT-00; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:30:33 +1300
    Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20051012082902.01bd4568@pop.ihug.co.n z>
    X-Sender: kkkkkkk@pop.ihug.co.nz
    X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0
    Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:30:33 +1300
    To: "xxxxxx" <xxxxx@inmap.co.nz>,
    xxxxx@incognito.integrated-mapping.com
    From: "yyyyyyy" <yyyyyyy@yyy.com>
    Subject: network
    Mime-Version: 1.0
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    821
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Zimbra conversations are based on subject. The two messages above have the same normalized subject (the normalized subject is the name of the conversation).

    Conversations work as follows:

    1. A message is received and the subject is normalized
    2. if no conversation exists for the normalized subject, a new conversation is created and this is the first msg in the conversation.
    3. if a conversation exists for the normalized subject
    3a. if the subject of the current msg has no subject prefix, the existing conversation is closed, a new conversation is created and this is the first msg in the new conversation.
    3b. if the subject of the current msg has a subject prefix, the new msg is appended to the existing conversation.

    You can see this algorithm is based on the order messages are received. When migrating messages, it is important to migrate the messages in time order, from oldest to newest, to allow the server to build conversations correctly.

    Given this description, is the behavior you are experiencing correct?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    thanks for the response

    Quote Originally Posted by sam
    Zimbra conversations are based on subject. The two messages above have the same normalized subject (the normalized subject is the name of the conversation).

    Conversations work as follows:
    ....
    Given this description, is the behavior you are experiencing correct?
    I guess it is. You're saying that to do the migration you need a tool that will build a message list across all of a users folders and then upload them in that order? Are there any tools that will do this?

    Why doesn't zimbra use the References and In-reply-to headers? The current algorithm seems to have 3 weaknesses

    1. if you use imapsync, it gets about 20% of the conversations wrong
    2. it's going to get it wrong anyway, e.g. I send a message to a mailing list then engage in a series of separate conversations, wont that result is some fairly muddle conversation threads?
    3. if someone changes the subject line, the conversation gets split. Not really very helpful as you can never be sure if you're looking at the complete conversation - silent failure
    Last edited by johnmcc; 10-22-2005 at 09:09 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    821
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Why doesn't zimbra use the References and In-reply-to headers?
    If I remember correctly (someone will chime in if I don't), we chose the subject based approach because it is a lowest-common-denomator solution. For example, we couldn't base the conversation-grouping algorithm based on References or In-Reply-To headers because not all MUA's supply them. It is possible that we could enhance the current algorithm to support In-Reply-To and References, but this is pretty low priority on our current roadmap.

    You're saying that to do the migration you need a tool that will build a message list across all of a users folders and then upload them in that order? Are there any tools that will do this?
    Exactly. The only tool that I am aware of that does this is our Migration Wizard (which currently only supports migrating from Exchange).

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    155
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sam
    If I remember correctly (someone will chime in if I don't), we chose the subject based approach because it is a lowest-common-denomator solution. For example, we couldn't base the conversation-grouping algorithm based on References or In-Reply-To headers because not all MUA's supply them. It is possible that we could enhance the current algorithm to support In-Reply-To and References, but this is pretty low priority on our current roadmap.
    Sure, it makes a lot of sense to look at the subject. I believe even Outlook struggles to send a proper In-Reply-To, or at least did at one point.

    Also, I think the Conversation View is a neat feature.

    However, as currently implemented, I think it's of limited use, and perhaps even confusing. A lot of users who don't know any better don't do so well at choosing email subjects.... for our weekly staff meeting, it'll often just be "Meeting Today". Also, most of my family tends to send emails with a subject of "Hi". The current algorithm also makes it much more likely that two concurrent but unrelated conversations could get mixed together.

    All the above could make the conversation view somewhat confusing for users.

    It wouldn't be so bad, except that conversation mode is the default view. I think I would change that for our users until In-Reply-To is supported.

    I have my current email client setup to first look at In-Reply-To, if it exists. If not, fall back to Subject. I've found that sorting to work really well.

    I know you guys have plenty to do. That change is simple enough that I might even dig into the code and see if I can figure out how to alter the algorithm... I'll let you know how it goes :-)

    Have a good one,
    -Eric

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Vienna, Austria (Europe)
    Posts
    59
    Rep Power
    8

    Question wrong conversations with emptysubjects merged

    Two unrelated emails, one with an empty subject, and te other only having Re: as subject get mixed together into a conversation.

    The user's have stress because they fear that the email to the boss and the email from the girlfriend got mixed up at the recipients side ;-)

    As this is the only related post I found, and it's quite old, can someone give me a pointer what to do, or if a bug exists?

  9. #9
    phoenix is offline Zimbra Consultant & Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Vannes, France
    Posts
    23,587
    Rep Power
    58

    Default

    The threaded view does look slightly wrong at times but there is absolutely no chance of them being 'mixed up' - the thread only shows in the users mailbox in the web UI and not anywhere else.

    Have a look in bugzilla and see if there are any related topics or RFEs, you could file an entry for better threading (copies of the mail that ends up in the same thread might help - use the show original option).
    Regards


    Bill


    Acompli: A new adventure for Co-Founder KevinH.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-23-2014, 12:08 PM
  2. INSTALLATION PROBLEM ON Centos 4.3 x_86-64Bit.
    By jawad@cogilent.com in forum Installation
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 08:09 AM
  3. 32 - bit to 64 - bit
    By crips07 in forum Installation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-09-2007, 12:33 PM
  4. Ubuntu broken.
    By shankariyer in forum Installation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-12-2006, 11:26 AM
  5. 64 bit versus 32 bit
    By jjmaher in forum Administrators
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-06-2006, 11:12 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •