Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot,nfs or memory indexing

[Timo Sirainen]

On Aug 4, 2008, at 5:46 PM, Sebastian Tymków wrote:

No, but the problem has more to do with caching. If you use a client that fetches the same data often (such as message headers/sizes) then Dovecot will do the same work for each request. In that case in-memory indexes perform poorly. This is more of a problem with webmail clients and less of a

problem with Outlook/Thunderbird.

And what about if I want use both  solutions ,
memory indexing for POP3 and hd-indexing for webmail? Are there any
disadventages ?

But it probably wouldn't hurt to disable indexes for POP3.

Well, assuming you're using Dovecot v1.1 it should already do most of this automatically. It still writes dovecot.index and dovecot.index.log files but it shouldn't touch dovecot.index.cache file.

If you're using POP3 that also performs poorly without indexes with v1.0.

v1.1 makes it better.

Other problem is that indexes created on nfs sometimes get crushed and I

need to delete indexes in case of

don't see any).

fetching mails ( I see mails on hd but when telnet on host and make stat I

So Dovecot says there are no mails while there are in fact?

Is it possible that something goes wrong on NFS connection ?

Yes. But when I delete indexes and they are recreated everything works fine.

Instead of deleting indexes you could try if it helps to simply run "touch cur new" in the maildir to make sure Dovecot resynchronizes the mailboxes. If that doesn't help I'd like to get a copy of the dovecot.index, dovecot.index.log and dovecot-uidlist files and "ls -l" list of the files in new/ and cur/. (None of those files contain any sensitive data).

Does version 1.1.x correct this errors ?
v1.1 makes NFS work a lot better, so it's highly recommended.

Does it stable version ? Can I use it on production without any problems ?

Many people are.

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part