Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage

2007-04-08 Thread Thierry de Montaudry
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 17:34:23 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: >I wasted some time yesterday and today implementing a SQL storage >plugin. It seems to be working, but: > - Saving new messages is done in a regular INSERT statement, which is >bad. PostgreSQL has at least this COPY TO command which could

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Timo Sirainen
On 1.4.2007, at 2.09, Charles Marcus wrote: One of the biggest advantages I can think of is single instance storage. I was planning on implementing that for dbox also. Timo? Can you elaborate on how thi sis implemented? Is the message broken up into parts? How hard would it be to implement

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage

2007-03-31 Thread Ejay Hire
hi. I'm sure this is on hold in your head, but just in case.. Can this be V2.0 minimum, please. Thanks, Ejay On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 17:34 +0300, Timo Sirainen wrote: > I wasted some time yesterday and today implementing a SQL storage > plugin. It seems to be working, but: > > - Saving new messa

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Jens Knoell
Charles Marcus wrote: On 3/31/2007 Stephen Lee wrote: WRT size of the db, what about keeping just the message headers and indices in the db and the body as a file? This is akin to some content management systems where the file info is in a db and the content resides as a file. Don't know what

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Charles Marcus
On 3/31/2007 Stephen Lee wrote: WRT size of the db, what about keeping just the message headers and indices in the db and the body as a file? This is akin to some content management systems where the file info is in a db and the content resides as a file. Don't know what the logistics and perfor

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Marc Perkel
Stephen Lee wrote: On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 19:30 +0200, Martin Hudec wrote: Well imagine that we have 100 users in company, each of them has 200M mailbox usually filled at least to 150M. That gives us 15G database (I am not counting administrative overhead like indexes etc.). Lovely. What

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Timothy Martin
On Mar 31, 2007, at 11:36am, Stephen Lee wrote: On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 19:30 +0200, Martin Hudec wrote: Well imagine that we have 100 users in company, each of them has 200M mailbox usually filled at least to 150M. That gives us 15G database (I am not counting administrative overhead like i

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Juha Saarinen
WRT size of the db, what about keeping just the message headers and indices in the db and the body as a file? Sounds very Outlook/$Exchange that... -- Juha http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Stephen Lee
On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 19:30 +0200, Martin Hudec wrote: > > Well imagine that we have 100 users in company, each of them has 200M > mailbox usually filled at least to 150M. That gives us 15G database (I > am not counting administrative overhead like indexes etc.). > > Lovely. What would such da

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Martin Hudec
Marc Perkel wrote: I've been waiting till 1.0 came out to ask for new features like SQL. I don't think that SQL is a waste of time at all. In fact I believe that SQL is the future of email storage. SQL has a lot of advantages that will be tapped once people start using it. Yes - it is probably

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Richard P. Welty
Timo Sirainen wrote: I wasted some time yesterday and today implementing a SQL storage plugin. It seems to be working, but: - Saving new messages is done in a regular INSERT statement, which is bad. PostgreSQL has at least this COPY TO command which could be used instead. depending on the c

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Stephen Lee
On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 08:46 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote: > > I've been waiting till 1.0 came out to ask for new features like SQL. I > don't think that SQL is a waste of time at all. In fact I believe that > SQL is the future of email storage. SQL has a lot of advantages that > will be tapped onc

Re: [Dovecot] SQL mail storage - yes yes yes!

2007-03-31 Thread Marc Perkel
Timo Sirainen wrote: I wasted some time yesterday and today implementing a SQL storage plugin. It seems to be working, but: - Saving new messages is done in a regular INSERT statement, which is bad. PostgreSQL has at least this COPY TO command which could be used instead. - It breaks in stre

[Dovecot] SQL mail storage

2007-03-31 Thread Timo Sirainen
I wasted some time yesterday and today implementing a SQL storage plugin. It seems to be working, but: - Saving new messages is done in a regular INSERT statement, which is bad. PostgreSQL has at least this COPY TO command which could be used instead. - It breaks in stress testing - It's not th