On 05/28/2011 08:19 AM, Jake Vickers wrote:
On 05/27/2011 12:10 AM, Eric Shubert wrote:
On 05/26/2011 07:55 PM, Jake Vickers wrote:
> On 05/26/2011 05:41 PM, Eric Shubert wrote:
>>
>> I would like to see QMT get to a single-table configuration for
>> vpopmail/mysql. Is that never going to happen, or perhaps happen
>> with 5.5? It might be best to leave vpopmail at 5.4.x with QMTv2.0,
>> then upgrade to 5.5 with QMTv2.x, and go to single-table domains at
>> that time. Just a thought.
>>
>
> I haven't given it much thought - anyone care to test what the
> performance impact is by going to a single table? Is there any?
> I know we hijacked this thread, so let's spin off a new one.
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apologies for the hijack.
I just seem to recall this being discussed a bit, some time ago, and
concluding (perhaps with no consensus) that having all domains in a
single table made more sense.
So I'm still curious as to what you think the benefits are. Segregating
your data into multiple tables was always the way I learned to obtain
performance. The nature of the requests from QMT are probably not those
that would require any performance tuning - the only one I've ever run
into is the default number of connections. So I'm willing to table that
point if there are other mitigating factors.
I agree that performance should not be a consideration in this case. If
that's the reason why this option was used (or even developed) in the
first place, I think it was a poor choice. The amount of data we're
talking about is probably all cached anyhow, even with a fairly large
number of domains and users.
So what are the advantages/benefits you are thinking will be gained from
a single table?
Various reasons, most of which were identified in previous discussions I
linked to in the first post on this thread.
If you're looking for a reason why this *must* (or even strongly should)
be done, I don't think there is one. The possibility or actuality of its
removal is probably the best reason.
The strongest reason to me (most irritating aspect anywise) is that it's
just bad design. For instance, in an accounting database, I wouldn't
expect to see a separate invoice table for each customer. Would you? It
sort of boils down to the question of whether a domain name belongs to
the realm of the database schema or the realm of the user data. I think
the later is most appropriate, even proper.
BL, I think removing the option makes the vpopmail database a little
less convoluted than it presently is. Not a big deal though.
--
-Eric 'shubes'
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qmailtoaster is sponsored by Vickers Consulting Group
(www.vickersconsulting.com)
Vickers Consulting Group offers Qmailtoaster support and installations.
If you need professional help with your setup, contact them today!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please visit qmailtoaster.com for the latest news, updates, and packages.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
