On 18.5.2007, at 5.41, Christian Balzer wrote:
Yes, all these FS based approaches currently have one or more of the issues Timo lists. The question of course is, will a replicated dovecot be less complex, slow, etc.
The good thing is at least that Dovecot won't be any more complex if you're not using replication. :) I think pretty much all of the replication can be handled with a plugin and this dovecot-replication binary.
I also tend to have imap clients open on multiple machines, so the assumption that a user's mailbox will only be accessed from 1 IP is probably a bad one.Yes, I know. But usually there's only one client that's actively modifying the mailbox. The readers don't need global locking because they're not changing anything. Except \Recent flag updates..We have multiple ACTIVE clients accessing the same mailbox all the time. Company role accounts love that kind of setup. ^_^
I think moving a global lock from one computer to another could still be faster than all-the-time proxying. But this of course depends on the locking implementation and perhaps other things I haven't considered yet.
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
