On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Tim Mooney wrote:
Is there any down-side to setting MIXDATAROLL to a value large enough so that rollover never happens, e.g. 250 MB if you have 250 MB email quotas?
Besides the backup benefits going away, expunges are also likely to be slower (as slow as mbx) and you have a greater vulnerability because a lot more rewriting needs to be done.
All the backup detriments (lots of small files) would also go away.
How is there a "backup detriment"? The main detriment is cosmetic, at least until you start getting into 4 or 5 digit file counts. Backup systems are supposed to be able to handle backing up multiple files.
Would MIX with a large MIXDATAROLL still be better than MBX, primarily because it's less prone to corruption and recovering from corruption is easier? How about performance vs. MBX? Slightly (but not much) worse, in most cases?
You would lose most of the benefit of mix with the exception of fast open. In other respects, it'll probably be slower (due to more work to do) and less reliable (due to greater complexity) than mbx.
Much of the corruption protection in mix comes from the avoidance of large files.
-- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ Imap-uw mailing list [email protected] https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
