From: "Mark Crispin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: File Locking


> On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I may be revealing my ignorance again, but I think we were using
> > qpopper before we even decided to use IMAP at all, that had problems
over
> > NFS because it locks, makes a copy and if you are saving messages on the
> > server copies it back. All that happening over NFS doubled our I/O
> > requirements. cucipop doesn't make a copy so we began to use it. Shortly
> > thereafter we decided to also include IMAP access to "reduce POP I/O
> > traffic" and now IMAP access has become a value-added service.
>
> It sounds to me as if you folks are thrashing about trying different
> things to see what will work, but for some reason have chosen to ignore
> (or reject) advice from sites which have made things work.

That pretty much sums it up and really you are preaching to the choir here.
Those were the answers I was looking for and you couldn't have put it in any
better words than you did below. Thanks for your help.

> In my opinion, your fundamental system architecture is fatally flawed; and
> you are doomed to repeat this thrashing until you change the architecture
> to one that is not so flawed.
>
> Quite frankly, you would be better off than you are now if you got rid of
> all those CPUs and running everything on what is now the NFS server.  You
> are not gaining any benefit from the additional CPUs, and the introduction
> of NFS significantly hurts matters.  I doubt very much that Lustre will
> remedy the NFS issues, much less address the fundamental flaws in the
> architecture.
>
> > I'll have to look in to ipop3d. Does it make a temporary working copy,
and
> > then write back to the mbox when it is done?
>
> No.
>
> > does it have a mailing list on which it would be more appropriate to
discuss
> > these things?
>
> Perhaps the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
>

Reply via email to