On 281, 10 07, 2008 at 03:10:47PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 11:38 +0400, Andrey Panin wrote: > > On 279, 10 05, 2008 at 10:38:02PM +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > > On Sun, 2008-10-05 at 21:28 +0200, Luuk wrote: > > > > > > > Last but not least, what gain will i have by using this plugin in > > > > combination with Maildir, or will it have more impact when mails are > > > > stored in mbox. > > > > > > I guess it depends on the size of your mails. With mboxes it can be used > > > only with read-only archives, so it's not all that useful. With maildir > > > it can be used transparently with read-write mailboxes. I've no idea > > > what the performance difference or space improvements are. I guess > > > that'll also depend on your system. > > > > I use zlib compressed maildirs on my primary server (12000+ users) and it > > achieves average compression ratio of 1.8, so if your system is io-bound > > you can spend some cpu cycles to significantly decrease disk load. > > But is that 1.8 in bytes or disk blocks?
Bytes. > Or does it make much of a > difference either way? Does 2x less space per message even matter with > small messages since most disk I/O probably goes to seeking, so reading > a single 4 kB message takes pretty much the same time as a 8 kB message? Yes, for small messages it's not very usefull, but multimegabyte mails are quite common nowadays and for them compression is a clear win. Also I remember that load average decreased when I started to use message compression. I have no real numbers now, but it was noticeable. -- Andrey Panin | Linux and UNIX system administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] | PGP key: wwwkeys.pgp.net
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
