Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:08 PM, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
I can see where large mailservers would benefit from significant write
performance increases - but unless the server is being actively
limited by the local delivery agent, what other performance benefits
does this offer
On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:08 PM, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
I can see where large mailservers would benefit from significant
write performance increases - but unless the server is being
actively limited by the local delivery agent, what other performance
benefits does this offer?
In particular,
I can see where large mailservers would benefit from significant write
performance increases - but unless the server is being actively limited
by the local delivery agent, what other performance benefits does this
offer?
In particular, is there any increase in READ performance by using dbox?
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 18:26 -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> maildir: ~330 -> ~110 msgs/sec, 9789 msgs/60 sec
With maildir_very_dirty_syncs=yes (just committed to v1.2 hg):
~1100 -> ~110 msgs/sec, 11904 msgs/60 sec.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-dbox-redesign/
Looks like multi-dbox scales pretty nicely. Even after 100k messages the
peak saved msgs/sec is the same as the initial saved msgs/sec, even if
the average slows down somewhat.
I tested this by first deleting mailbox, then running "imaptest" for a
seco
