On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Bob Atkins wrote:
> Yes, that is correct. The mix format consists of many files in a
[snip..]
> status info which makes access /_very_/ fast. FYI, we implemented our
> mix solution using 10MB files rather than the default 1MB size because
> we felt that would be a more efficient file size and it has proven to
> work very well. As those who went down the maildir path (with another
> imap server) have painfully discovered - directories with too many
> inodes are very slow to search. mix is a great balance between not too
> many inodes and keeping file sizes and linear search runs to a minimum.
I'll second everything that Bob said plus the BIG advantage
of improved backup performance. Now our incremental backups
actually buy us something. No more "incremental is almost same
as full because each of those huge mbox/mbx inboxes got one new
message" syndrome.
It's also kinda fun to talk to the Exchange admins and watch them
cringe when I talk about our users who have 5GB inboxes with
30K messages in them. ;)
--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
_______________________________________________
Imap-uw mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
