Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-28 Thread Tanstaafl
On 2/22/2017, 3:46:08 PM, KT Walrus wrote: > I want to use mdbox format but I have heard that these index files do > get corrupted occasionally and have to be rebuilt (possibly using an > older version of the index file to construct a new one). I worry that > using mdbox might cause my users to se

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-23 Thread KT Walrus
> On Feb 23, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 23.00, Timo Sirainen wrote: >> >> I mainly see such external databases as additional reasons for things to >> break. And even if not, additional extra layers of latency. > > Oh, just thought that I should clarify this

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-23 Thread Timo Sirainen
On 23 Feb 2017, at 23.00, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > I mainly see such external databases as additional reasons for things to > break. And even if not, additional extra layers of latency. Oh, just thought that I should clarify this and I guess other things I said. I think there are two separate

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-23 Thread Timo Sirainen
On 22 Feb 2017, at 22.46, KT Walrus wrote: > >> On Feb 22, 2017, at 2:44 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: >> >> I guess mainly the message sequence numbers in IMAP protocol makes this more >> difficult, but it's not an impossible problem to solve. > > Any thoughts on the wisdom of supporting an exter

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-23 Thread Ruga
Yes, and they (isode) still use it as marketing evidence. The benchmarking tool project also seems out of maintenance. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 8:52 AM, M. Balridge <'dove...@r.paypc.com'> wrote: Quoting Ruga : > Comparison of Dovecot, Uwash, Courier, Cyrus and M-Box

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-23 Thread @lbutlr
On 23 Feb 2017, at 00:33, Ruga wrote: > Comparison of Dovecot, Uwash, Courier, Cyrus and M-Box: > http://www.isode.com/whitepapers/mbox-benchmark.html Uwash? as in UW IMAP that I used briefly in 1999? That hasn't seen an update in a decade? -- Apple broke AppleScripting signatures in Mail.app

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-22 Thread M. Balridge
Quoting Ruga : > Comparison of Dovecot, Uwash, Courier, Cyrus and M-Box: > http://www.isode.com/whitepapers/mbox-benchmark.html Wow. That comparison is only 11.5 years old. The "default" file system of reiserfs and gcc-3.3 were dead giveaways. I suspect Dovecot's changed a tad since that test

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-22 Thread Ruga
Comparison of Dovecot, Uwash, Courier, Cyrus and M-Box: http://www.isode.com/whitepapers/mbox-benchmark.html

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-22 Thread KT Walrus
> On Feb 22, 2017, at 2:44 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > I guess mainly the message sequence numbers in IMAP protocol makes this more > difficult, but it's not an impossible problem to solve. Any thoughts on the wisdom of supporting an external database for session state or even mailbox state (

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-22 Thread Timo Sirainen
On 22 Feb 2017, at 17.07, KT Walrus wrote: > > I have seen proposals for a new client protocol called JMAP that seem to be > all about running a mail server at scale like an NGINX https web server can > scale. That got me thinking about wether there is anything fundamental about > IMAP that ca

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-22 Thread KT Walrus
> On Feb 21, 2017, at 11:12 PM, Christian Balzer wrote: > But even if you were to implement something that can handle 1 million or > more sessions per server, would you want to? > As in, if that server goes down, the resulting packet, authentication > storm will be huge and most like result in a

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-22 Thread KT Walrus
> On Feb 21, 2017, at 11:12 PM, Christian Balzer wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:49:39 -0500 KT Walrus wrote: > >> I just read this blog: >> https://mrotaru.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/scaling-to-12-million-concurrent-connections-how-migratorydata-did-it/ >> >>

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-22 Thread Sami Ketola
> On 22 Feb 2017, at 6.12, Christian Balzer wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:49:39 -0500 KT Walrus wrote: > >> I just read this blog: >> https://mrotaru.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/scaling-to-12-million-concurrent-connections-how-migratorydata-did-it/ >> >>

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-21 Thread Ruga
A more efficient algorithm would reduce computational complexity, and the need for expensive power-hungry CPUs. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 5:12 AM, Christian Balzer <'ch...@gol.com'> wrote: On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:49:39 -0500 KT Walrus wrote: > I just read this blog: >

Re: Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-21 Thread Christian Balzer
On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:49:39 -0500 KT Walrus wrote: > I just read this blog: > https://mrotaru.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/scaling-to-12-million-concurrent-connections-how-migratorydata-did-it/ > >

Scaling to 10 Million IMAP sessions on a single server

2017-02-21 Thread KT Walrus
I just read this blog: https://mrotaru.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/scaling-to-12-million-concurrent-connections-how-migratorydata-did-it/ about scaling to 12 Million Concurrent Connect