NFS Config vs Ceph / GlusterFS
That is why I am using mdbox files of 4MB. I hope that should give me hardly any write amplification. I am also seperating between ssd and hdd pools by auto archiving email to the hdd pools I am using rbd. After luminuous I had some issues with the cephfs and do not want to store operational stuff on it yet. I am very interested in that setup, since I am currently planning to reshape my cluster in a similar way (currently from sole distribution via director to distribution + HA). Could you post a short overview (scheme) and some important configurations of your setup? Did you do any performancetesting? Also, when you say rbd in a clustered context, is that one block device per node while the director still spreads the accounts over the nodes? Thanks in advance, M. Schmidt OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: resend whole inbox to user
> On 04/06/2022 1:29 PM Marc wrote: > > I was wondering if there is some way to force an imap client to 're-download' > all the messages from the inbox. I can remember in the 'old days' that when > the connection was dropped during a pop download, the whole inbox was > re-downloaded, resulting in quite a lot of duplicates. I am looking for such > action. You can change the UIDVALIDITY of the mailbox. This invalidates the client cache which would cause a (well-behaving) client to rebuild that mailbox from current server state. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3501#section-2.3.1.1 michael
RE: resend whole inbox to user
> > I was wondering if there is some way to force an imap client to 're- > download' all the messages from the inbox. I can remember in the 'old > days' that when the connection was dropped during a pop download, the > whole inbox was re-downloaded, resulting in quite a lot of duplicates. I > am looking for such action. > > > > > > While not a 'dovecot' question.. IMAP does NOT download messages in the > first place, so there is no such thing as re-download. I am not sure. In the worst case you have to change all unique msgids or so, not? > You simply set the IMAP client to 'synchronize' if you want a copy > stored locally. Eg, in Thunderbird, click on properties, > synchronization, Select this folder for offline use, download. I think the default behaviour of most clients is synchronize the inbox. Download synchronize, what is in the name.
Re: resend whole inbox to user
On 2022-04-06 12:29, Marc wrote: I was wondering if there is some way to force an imap client to 're-download' all the messages from the inbox. I can remember in the 'old days' that when the connection was dropped during a pop download, the whole inbox was re-downloaded, resulting in quite a lot of duplicates. I am looking for such action. While not a 'dovecot' question.. IMAP does NOT download messages in the first place, so there is no such thing as re-download. You simply set the IMAP client to 'synchronize' if you want a copy stored locally. Eg, in Thunderbird, click on properties, synchronization, Select this folder for offline use, download. Every email client calls this something else, but the idea is the same. 'Keep local copy' is another common term. Please check the help documentation on the email client of choice. -- "Catch the Magic of Linux..." Michael Peddemors, President/CEO LinuxMagic Inc. Visit us at http://www.linuxmagic.com @linuxmagic A Wizard IT Company - For More Info http://www.wizard.ca "LinuxMagic" a Registered TradeMark of Wizard Tower TechnoServices Ltd. 604-682-0300 Beautiful British Columbia, Canada This email and any electronic data contained are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company.
resend whole inbox to user
I was wondering if there is some way to force an imap client to 're-download' all the messages from the inbox. I can remember in the 'old days' that when the connection was dropped during a pop download, the whole inbox was re-downloaded, resulting in quite a lot of duplicates. I am looking for such action.
RE: NFS Config vs Ceph / GlusterFS
> > I have about 100TB of mailboxes in Maildir format on NFS (NetApp FAS) > and works very well, for performance but also stability. Hmmm, I would like to read something else. Eg that the design/elementary properties of distributed storage result into that all such systems are performing about the same. Maybe there should be more focus on ceph performance development instead of this cephadm? > The main problem of using Ceph or GlusterFS to store Maildir is the high > use of metadata that dovecot require for check new messages and others > activity. On my storage/NFS the main part of the traffic and I/O is > metadata traffic on small file (high file count workload). That is why I am using mdbox files of 4MB. I hope that should give me hardly any write amplification. I am also seperating between ssd and hdd pools by auto archiving email to the hdd pools > > And Ceph or GlusterFS are very inefficient with this kind of workload > (many metadata GETATTR/ACCESS/LOOKUP and high numer of small files). I am using rbd. After luminuous I had some issues with the cephfs and do not want to store operational stuff on it yet.
Re: NFS Config vs Ceph / GlusterFS
Hi, I have about 100TB of mailboxes in Maildir format on NFS (NetApp FAS) and works very well, for performance but also stability. The main problem of using Ceph or GlusterFS to store Maildir is the high use of metadata that dovecot require for check new messages and others activity. On my storage/NFS the main part of the traffic and I/O is metadata traffic on small file (high file count workload). And Ceph or GlusterFS are very inefficient with this kind of workload (many metadata GETATTR/ACCESS/LOOKUP and high numer of small files). Ciao Il 05/04/22 01:40, dove...@ptld.com ha scritto: Do all of the configuration considerations pertaining to using NFS on https://doc.dovecot.org/configuration_manual/nfs/ equally apply to using something like Ceph / GlusterFS? And if people wouldn't mind chiming in with which (NFS, Ceph & GlusterFS) they feel is better for maildir mail storage on dedicated non-container servers? Which is better for robustness / stability? Which is better for speed / performance? Thank you.
