>
> > That is why I am using mdbox files of 4MB. I hope that should give me hardly
> any write amplification. I am also seperating between ssd and hdd pools by
> auto
> archiving email to the hdd pools
> > I am using rbd. After luminuous I had some issues with the cephfs and do not
> want to stor
That is why I am using mdbox files of 4MB. I hope that should give me hardly
any write amplification. I am also seperating between ssd and hdd pools by auto
archiving email to the hdd pools
I am using rbd. After luminuous I had some issues with the cephfs and do not
want to store operational
>
> I have about 100TB of mailboxes in Maildir format on NFS (NetApp FAS)
> and works very well, for performance but also stability.
Hmmm, I would like to read something else. Eg that the design/elementary
properties of distributed storage result into that all such systems are
performing abou
Hi,
I have about 100TB of mailboxes in Maildir format on NFS (NetApp FAS)
and works very well, for performance but also stability.
The main problem of using Ceph or GlusterFS to store Maildir is the high
use of metadata that dovecot require for check new messages and others
activity. On my s
Do all of the configuration considerations pertaining to using NFS on
https://doc.dovecot.org/configuration_manual/nfs/
equally apply to using something like Ceph / GlusterFS?
And if people wouldn't mind chiming in with which (NFS, Ceph & GlusterFS) they
feel is better for maildir mail sto
