Thanks for your sharing, Daniel. On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 4:12 PM Daniel Miller <dmil...@amfes.com> wrote:
> On April 23, 2019 10:54:38 PM luckydog xf <luckydo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is it worthwile to use dbox? seeing from >> http://www.linuxmail.info/mbox-maildir-mail-storage-formats/ it may >> cause file lock and easy to corrupt. >> >> As with everything - it depends. You're asking me so these are *my* > opinions - and I do not claim to be anything more than a hobbyist/tinkerer > when the comes to this. > > mbox has potential use for long term read-only archives - I see no reason > to use it for live mailboxes. > > maildir is undoubtedly the least susceptible to corruption. It's also the > slowest format for reading. How slow is "slow" depends on your hardware - > it may be imperceptible with enough RAM and SSD's - or it may result in > user complaints with large mailboxes. > > dbox is Dovecot's preferred format. I know Timo has put a lot of effort > into it. sdbox is similar to maildir in that each mail is a separate file. > mdbox significantly reduces the number of files which can make file-based > backups faster. Both dbox formats are dependent on their index files. > > If you've got good hardware, including a proper UPS, I'd recommend dbox > (my server is presently using sdbox). With large mailboxes and file-based > backups you'll benefit from mdbox. When reliability is the #1 concern above > anything else - use maildir. Depending on your use SIS can have significant > impact on storage requirements - but storage these days is relatively cheap. > > I haven't seen much feedback from users actively using SIS - I'd love to > hear from high traffic sites with SIS experience to know if the corruption > issues have been resolved. In my case there was at least a 30% reduction in > space but I had too many errors - admittedly it's been a couple years since > I last tried it. > > -- > Daniel >
