Aaron Stone wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2007, Charles Marcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> This capability alone would probably reduce my mailstore by 80+%.

Those are bold words.  I would love to see a schema or detailed design
proposal. So lets think about this a little.

now we have

mailfolders <- messages -> physmessages <- messageblks

the first two are not relevant here so we get

physmsg <- blks

where we'd need

physmsg <- blklist -> blks

That would suggest:

dbmail_blkslist:
id big int primary key
physmessage_id big int foreign key
messageblk_id big int foreigh key

So: The messageblks table would have to drop the reference to the
physmessage table, add an md5hash field (unique indexed), and you're
pretty much done. But all queries using the messageblks table would have
to be revisited. Luckily, those are very few

> It's on the feature wishlist, but I don't think we can do it this year.

Call me an optimist, but if those numbers are indeed correct, we may
have to reschedule (provided resources are available). It's not that
much work, and I know how to do it. And 80% or even 50% gain in storage
should be worth something significant even at current storage cost.


-- 
  ________________________________________________________________
  Paul Stevens                                      paul at nfg.nl
  NET FACILITIES GROUP                     GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31
  The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl
_______________________________________________
DBmail mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.fastxs.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail

Reply via email to