On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 15:21:23 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
> Hello again and thanks for the quick answer!
>
> Our base (inbox) namespace is based on MDBOX with SIS
>
> SIS is fantastic optimizing the storage required to the active (daily
> accessed/moved) email.
>
> But for archival and easy
Hello again and thanks for the quick answer!
Our base (inbox) namespace is based on MDBOX with SIS
SIS is fantastic optimizing the storage required to the active (daily
accessed/moved) email.
But for archival and easy recover of some specific user mailbox/folder
it isn't practical to rely on
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 10:00:59 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Thank you for the suggestion.
>
> That solved the problem of using layout FS with MBOX storage format.
>
> After copying all the mail of the test user to the namespace in this
> format I've compressed all the storage file
Hello!
Thank you for the suggestion.
That solved the problem of using layout FS with MBOX storage format.
After copying all the mail of the test user to the namespace in this
format I've compressed all the storage files with ZSTD and that changed
the name with the additional suffix .zst
Dov
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 10:35:24 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> Our archive namespace is kept in MBOX format with Maildir++ layout due to:
>
> * Need to have the email from all users/folders self contained (our
> base namespace uses MDBOX with single instance storage of a
Hello everyone!
Our archive namespace is kept in MBOX format with Maildir++ layout due to:
* Need to have the email from all users/folders self contained (our
base namespace uses MDBOX with single instance storage of attachments)
* MBOX/FS layout isn't supported because some folders have me
