On 18/10/17 05:02, Ralph Ballier wrote: > > Hello Sandino, > > thanks für your hints, to use sys dbmail 3.2 rather than dbmail 3.1. > But do you had read about problems with dbmail 3.2 and mysql 5.7? > Every INSERT does not work. I myself have tried it. > I have not tried dbmail with MySQL. I have used PostgreSQL for dbmail since 2004. I could not give you any advice about MySQL but table structure is the same; there shouldn't be any difference. > > > I found in git a workaround for this, but I have not tried it. I think > it is not a good idea to join the parts for a system at different > sites, if the system should run stable. > > Is dbmail 3.2 really so much better than dbmail 3.1?? > 3.1 is not developed either. > > Also dbmail 3.2 is not further developed > Mime parts deduplication is slower on inserts but you will save lots of space, specially on corporate e-mail with lots of Cc per message. You should be careful with headers deduplication because dbmail_headername and dbmail_headervalue grow very fast unless you set header_cache_readonly = yes. Some queries using left joins take more than 1 second but I have not had the urgency to fine tune them. Some headers like date and message-id might use their own cache tables to improve index searches and reduce unneeded left join cycles on dbmail_header. Header deduplication is a good idea but date and message-id are mostly unique so deduplication is useless on them. I have neither had the urgency to fix this. I will send the patch to the list if I ever need to. Considering all these, dbmail 3.2 with PostgreSQL has been running stable on my servers for more than a year. > > > Ralph > > > > _______________________________________________ > DBmail mailing list > DBmail@dbmail.org > http://lists.nfg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
-- Sandino Araico Sánchez http://sandino.net
_______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list DBmail@dbmail.org http://lists.nfg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
