From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E3FDx-0000LH-GU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 15:44:05 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7BFfe6m000075; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 15:41:40 GMT Received: from bigbrother.ncuk.net (bigbrother.ncuk.net [80.249.96.15]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7BFfdRL014074 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 15:41:39 GMT Received: from [84.12.112.252] (port=58555 helo=mini.home.pookey.co.uk) by bigbrother.ncuk.net with esmtp (Exim 4.21) id 1E3FCQ-0000NQ-OK; Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:42:30 +0100 From: "Ian P. Christian" Organization: Netconnex To: "A. Khattri" Subject: Re: [gentoo-server] Comments on IMAP Server (cyrus/courier/dovecot) Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:41:31 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.90 Cc: gentoo-server@lists.gentoo.org References: <1123731973.5878.30.camel@neuromancer.home.net> <200508111521.57216.pookey@pookey.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-server@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-server@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3313734.K7sQ1TrAcs"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200508111641.37118.pookey@pookey.co.uk> X-Spam-Score: -4.9 (----) X-Spam-Report: [-4.9 points, 6.5 required] -4.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Scan-Signature: 9f6d07637a9eeb9e970e6a7e13ae32ce X-Archives-Salt: b043fa31-e3f1-40f4-a650-2c9ac338177b X-Archives-Hash: ef438758fe0307fad6c8f13f94f42699 --nextPart3313734.K7sQ1TrAcs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 11 August 2005 16:09, A. Khattri wrote: > As I mentioned, some accounts have hundreds of Mb of messages and a few > have > 1Gb of email in them... That actually doesn't say anything about the number of messages though ;) > Of course, I know, good performance begins with good hardware. Our servers > all use SCSI disks (U160 or better), some are RAIDed, some not. Indeed - this is why you can't really compare your experience with the once= I=20 posted. He may well have been using rubbish hardware - but even if he wasn'= t,=20 the case remains this shows a vast improvement from cyrus over courier usin= g=20 the same hardware. > You could do something similar by NFS mounting maildirs across a cluster. You can create multiple frontends with this - but you'll still have one NFS= =20 server, or perhaps multiple NFS servers. You would have to create the logic= =20 and system that allowed the frontend IMAP/POP3 server to select the correct= =20 backend. Also, due to the fact that cyrus keeps advanced indexes, cyrus=20 can't operate over an NFS share. Courier doens't provide an 'out of the bo= x'=20 method for creating a two-tiered scalable IMAP cluster... as far as I know. I've seen this argument many times, on a mailing list I'm on the argument..= =2E=20 sorry, 'discussion' often occours, and it's nearly always courier vs cyrus,= =20 and in this list community cyrus usually comes up top. One day I think I'll setup a test system, and actaully run some benchmarks = to=20 settle the dispute once and for all ;) =2D-=20 Ian P. Christian ~ http://pookey.co.uk --nextPart3313734.K7sQ1TrAcs Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBC+3Gx6jsuvK/fgkoRAim8AJ4sGSyOhPDOjPgJ/s4FOKmyoDvRXgCgr6M3 t+LL45CQhovh2M+qTepIZeQ= =d8An -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3313734.K7sQ1TrAcs-- -- gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list