On 6/30/2011 9:03 AM, William Blunn wrote:
> On 30/06/2011 00:40, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> If you can live with the folder tree limitations of mbox
>
> Did you mean with or without considering
> http://wiki2.dovecot.org/MboxChildFolders ?
I was referring the to the classic mbox limitation of not b
On 30/06/2011 00:40, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
If you can live with the folder tree limitations of mbox
Did you mean with or without considering
http://wiki2.dovecot.org/MboxChildFolders ?
Bill
On 6/29/2011 11:12 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 18:40 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
>> Since maildir is IOPS heavy and NFS/GFS/OCFS don't seem to like high
>> IOPS workloads that make heavy use of locking, mbox becomes very
>> attractive due to it's very low IOPS demands. If y
On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 18:40 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Since maildir is IOPS heavy and NFS/GFS/OCFS don't seem to like high
> IOPS workloads that make heavy use of locking, mbox becomes very
> attractive due to it's very low IOPS demands. If you can live with the
> folder tree limitations of m
On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 11:10 -0700, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> The parameters listed for nfs installations (mmap_disable,
> doctlock_use_excl, mail_nfs_storage, mail_nfs_index) - are they
> necessary for data integrity, and/or do they compensate for NFS latency
> and improve performance?
>
> My u
On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 18:40 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Since maildir is IOPS heavy and NFS/GFS/OCFS don't seem to like high
> IOPS workloads that make heavy use of locking, mbox becomes very
> attractive due to it's very low IOPS demands. If you can live with the
> folder tree limitations of
On 6/29/2011 1:10 PM, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> The parameters listed for nfs installations (mmap_disable,
> doctlock_use_excl, mail_nfs_storage, mail_nfs_index) - are they
> necessary for data integrity, and/or do they compensate for NFS latency
> and improve performance?
>
> My understanding is
The parameters listed for nfs installations (mmap_disable,
doctlock_use_excl, mail_nfs_storage, mail_nfs_index) - are they
necessary for data integrity, and/or do they compensate for NFS latency
and improve performance?
My understanding is the indexes are a critical part of a dbox storage,
bu
