So my question is this since I just moved over the new server to Dovecot as well and I like it.. but I did only IMAP should I then use the pop3 from Dovecot or just keep using pop3 from qmail? Does Dovecot update the roaming users..
Thanks Remo Ed McLain wrote: > I have to second, third, and fourth that. We moved from Courier to Dovecot > and the performance change was dramatic. We have 5,000+ accounts on 2 > clustered (active / active) servers utilizing GFS for the file system on a > SAS SAN and the fact that Dovecot had built in support for clustered setups > was a major plus. Had a few issues off the bat with POP3 UID's but quickly > fixed that one thanks to Dovecots easy to change UID definitions. Don't > think I'll ever change back. > > -- > Ed McLain > > > ________________________________ > From: Rick Romero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: <vchkpw@inter7.com> > Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:08:54 -0600 > To: <vchkpw@inter7.com> > Conversation: [vchkpw] [OT] IMAP Servers: Dovecot or Binc? > Subject: Re: [vchkpw] [OT] IMAP Servers: Dovecot or Binc? > > On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 11:11 -0800, Tom Collins wrote: >> Courier-IMAP seems to be putting a heavy load on my server when >> someone accesses a mailbox with a large number of messages in it. >> >> What's the preferred IMAP server for a machine that will have 100-200 >> connections (plan for growth...) but may have an occasional mailbox >> with 1000+ messages in it. I've searched the archives and tried to >> google for "imap server performance" and "imap server comparison" but >> haven't come up with much after an hour. > >> My impression is that Dovecot performs well, better than courier, but >> I'm wondering if anyone can offer up some real-world numbers to help >> me make my decision. > > Dovecot has really come out in the past year or so. I started with .99, > I upgraded from Courier, but honestly it wasn't really up to date. > > Dovecot's indexing showed an immediate improvement on large mailboxes. > With 1.0.5, the only issue I have is with a few older Mac clients. For > me this affects about 4 out of 450 clients total. > > I don't have any numbers, but I've had at least 1500 messages in my > INBOX, not including subfolders, with great performance. The change was > so dramatic I didn't need any numbers. > > Rick > > > > > > > > > > > > > !DSPAM:4769e9a7310541476714592!
