[pmmail-list] alright, I've had enough ...
Rod Whitworth
pmmail-list@blueprintsoftwareworks.com
Wed, 18 May 2005 10:31:37 +1000
--_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_5196232=_=_=_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On Tue, 17 May 2005 19:32:28 -0400 (EDT), Alex Taylor wrote:
>On Mon, 16 May 2005 23:17:00 +1000, "Rod Whitworth" wrote:
>>A single file ........... but it depends on two things: (i) how well the
>>app manages the file. and (ii) whether some external event can get at it.
>>It seems that nearly everybody writing MUAs is an out of work Unix hacker
>>trained in Sendmail and maybe that's due to many of the new ones (MUAs)
>>being designed for Linux where they'll fit right in with Sendmail or that
>>horrible UW crap.
Oh - I forgot another factor: If you have enough windows users you will know that sometimes good ol' windows
itself corrupts a file. Think system lockup requiring reboot whilst a file op is happening or something similar.
Want it to be just one mail file? Think losing one message vs losing your entire inbox. Murphy will see to it one
day. ;-)
>Speaking of UW, ISTR reading in one of their FAQs why they think it's a
>good idea, at least for IMAP, to use a single-file mailstore. Apparently
>they think the overhead of multiple open-read operations is massively
>greater than that of seeking through a single file. Maybe this comes from
>a background of running on Unix filesystems where that's a big issue, I'm
>not sure.
The reply is: http://www.courier-mta.org/fud/ to see about the FUD from the UW guy and http://www.courier-
mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir/ with all the data and test setups fully detailed.
Here is a quote from a webmail author answering a support question about IMAP speed with folders with large
numbers of mails ( the webmail client has no influence on speed - it depends on the mailstore and IMAPd):
===
UW is a bit slow compared to Cyrus or Courier so that is definately a
factor. I can open folders with 10k plus messages in courier almost as
quickly as folders with only 100 messages. The sort order you are
using also has a big effect on folder speed. Through various tests I
have determined that sorting by ARRIVAL is the fastest for almost every
IMAP server out there.
===
>Admittedly, it's probably more of an issue for the server-side mailstore
>than for a client...
I have heaps of stored mail in PMM going back for years.Just checked one account- it goes back to Jan 99.
Archived to CDs as backup but all on line too.
I guess no more than a thousand or so per folder but if I didn't get good access times and search speeds I'd look
for another way.
>--
>Alex Taylor <alextaylor41@rogers.com>
>http://www.cs-club.org/~alex
Rod/
--_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_5196232=_=_=_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
<FONT FACE="Palatino Linotype" DEFAULT="FACE"><FONT SIZE="4" POINTSIZE="14" DEFAULT="SIZE">On Tue, 17 May 2005 19:32:28 -0400 (EDT), Alex Taylor wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>On Mon, 16 May 2005 23:17:00 +1000, "Rod Whitworth" wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>A single file ........... but it depends on two things: (i) how well the <BR>
>>app manages the file. and (ii) whether some external event can get at it. <BR>
>>It seems that nearly everybody writing MUAs is an out of work Unix hacker <BR>
>>trained in Sendmail and maybe that's due to many of the new ones (MUAs) <BR>
>>being designed for Linux where they'll fit right in with Sendmail or that <BR>
>>horrible UW crap.<BR>
><BR>
Oh - I forgot another factor: If you have enough windows users you will know that sometimes good ol' windows itself corrupts a file. Think system lockup requiring reboot whilst a file op is happening or something similar.<BR>
Want it to be just one mail file? Think losing one message vs losing your entire inbox. Murphy will see to it one day. ;-)<BR>
<BR>
>Speaking of UW, ISTR reading in one of their FAQs why they think it's a <BR>
>good idea, at least for IMAP, to use a single-file mailstore. Apparently <BR>
>they think the overhead of multiple open-read operations is massively <BR>
>greater than that of seeking through a single file. Maybe this comes from <BR>
>a background of running on Unix filesystems where that's a big issue, I'm <BR>
>not sure.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
The reply is: http://www.courier-mta.org/fud/ to see about the FUD from the UW guy and http://www.courier-mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir/ with all the data and test setups fully detailed.<BR>
<BR>
Here is a quote from a webmail author answering a support question about IMAP speed with folders with large numbers of mails ( the webmail client has no influence on speed - it depends on the mailstore and IMAPd):<BR>
===<BR>
UW is a bit slow compared to Cyrus or Courier so that is definately a<BR>
factor. I can open folders with 10k plus messages in courier almost as<BR>
quickly as folders with only 100 messages. The sort order you are<BR>
using also has a big effect on folder speed. Through various tests I<BR>
have determined that sorting by ARRIVAL is the fastest for almost every<BR>
IMAP server out there. <BR>
===<BR>
<BR>
>Admittedly, it's probably more of an issue for the server-side mailstore <BR>
>than for a client...<BR>
<BR>
I have heaps of stored mail in PMM going back for years.Just checked one account- it goes back to Jan 99. Archived to CDs as backup but all on line too.<BR>
I guess no more than a thousand or so per folder but if I didn't get good access times and search speeds I'd look for another way.<BR>
><BR>
>-- <BR>
>Alex Taylor <<FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>alextaylor41@rogers.com<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U>><BR>
><FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>http://www.cs-club.org/~alex<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Rod/<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
--_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_5196232=_=_=_--