Sorry didn't catch the other post.
I also wouldn't recommend a db filesystem combination in such a dynamic
environment as a message reposetory, although in principle it's the same as
splitting the table. ....
Myselve is using a progress v91b and there will be some minor issue
concerning indexing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Serge Knystautas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: Input for JDB Mail Repository
> I don't know if you saw my other post, but I've changed (but not
committed)
> the JDBC repository to store the message body separately in the file
system
> (using Avalon's stream repository).
>
> I don't know if putting the message body into another table (put still in
> the DB) is going to help vs just putting it in a DB. I guess I'm used to
a
> DB that does the indexing well enough that the size of the record doesn't
> matter so much, although I do recognize sticking the entire message in the
> same table as everything else somewhat violates traditional DB design.
>
> Serge Knystautas
> Loki Technologies
> http://www.lokitech.com/
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "M.P. Willems" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 11:01 AM
> Subject: Re: Input for JDB Mail Repository
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Charles Benett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "James Dev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Jakarta-James User"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 1:15 PM
> > Subject: Input for JDB Mail Repository
> >
> >
> > > In cvs proposal dir is Serge's JDBCMailRepository and
> > > JDBCSpoolRepository.
> > > Serge uses Mssql server with Inet Sprinta (I think) and I have got it
> > > going with MySQL and the mm driver.
> > > This is intended to replace the town db classses in James 1.2.1
> > >
> > > At the moment, they new classes need to be re-compiled for different
> > > drivers and dbs.
> > > I want to tidy up the config and move them into the main tree.
> > > So I am looking for input from developers/ users.
> > >
> > > 1) At the moment the JDBCMailRepository (like the town repository)
puts
> > > all messages in one db table.
> > > a) Would it be useful to allows different tables, e.g. one for spam
> > > another for errors etc.?
> > > b) If one had multiple tables, how likely is it that one would have
them
> > > in different dbs or on different machines?
> > > c) If one had multiple tables, would we still want all POP3 inboxes to
> > > be in one table or would per-user tables make sense?
> > >
> > > Any other suggestions re storing mail in a db would be welcome.
> >
> >
> > Other suggestion:
> > Maybe there is a argument for changing the message table structure, the
> > records in the table "message" will be allowed to become bulky as a
result
> > of the defenition of the attribute "message body" , thus affecting
> > performance and scalabillity.
> > Maybe it's usefull to give some thoughts on putting those message body's
> > into a seperate table , in order to improve performance, operational
> > maintanance and if desirable allowing the assignment of storage area's
to
> > the table's.
> >
> >
> > > Charles
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
