On Jun 21, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:05 -0700, email builder wrote: >> Thank you very much for the fast reply. >> >>>> We are building a new system that will support a large number of users >> >>>> (high volume, high concurrent usage, etc). We have played with Dovecot, >>>> but in >>>> most serious applications we have traditionally used Courier IMAP. It's >>>> my >>>> (lay) understanding that with indexing and perhaps other things in >>>> Dovecot, it >>>> might perform better than Courier in larger environments like this. Am I >>>> correct or is it less clear-cut? >>> >>> If you disable index index files in Dovecot, its performance should be >>> slightly >>> better than Courier. With index files the performance is typically much >>> better >>> in Dovecot, especially if you use a (non-caching) webmail. >> >> Interesting. What would be the motivations for disabling indexing? >> Indexing is by default enabled? > > Yes, enabled by default. There aren't many good reasons for disabling > indexing. > >> Do you know what webmails are caching vs. non-caching? > > Nearly all of them are non-caching. (I don't know of any caching ones.)
Prayer, from University of Cambridge, or Chickadee, a fork of it. It's essentially a proper IMAP client in C that runs on a server, and uses HTTPS (via an embedded server, no external dependency on apache or etc.) to the end user just to deliver the display. When I was on the email project for the University of Minnesota, I modified it heavily for interface and to add some features that admins are used to having in systems where apache is involved (virtual hosts, things like that). I have it available (GPL) as a vanilla, de-branded package--Chickadee. Website is currently offline as I've been switching hosts, anyone who's interested can feel free to drop me a line. -Brian
