On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes. I was wondering if it could be done with Coda, but I don't
know anything about Coda, and it doesn't
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
During my research of the IMAP protocol, I determined that _the_best_
way to store email for high-performance would be to put them in a
database. This is because IMAP doesn't see email as a big blob of
text like POP does. It sees the headers as one
Jan Grant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
During my research of the IMAP protocol, I determined that _the_best_
way to store email for high-performance would be to put them in a
database. This is because IMAP doesn't see email as a big blob of
text like
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ I don't think that stuffing email into a database is a particularly good
idea since that means keeping large blobs of non-relational data floating
around, something that the filesystem can do a
The other advantages is it would scale like nobody's business. Since the
data is in postgres, you could use multiple backends (replicated with
Slony)
and have the IMAP daemons contact different back ends if the load got
heavy. With a little work, the system could failover silently as well.
David E. Meier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like I said, we'll never know till someone tries it. It looks like
Dovecot is going to try it eventually, but it seems like they have
other priorities at this time.
Someone already stores mails in a database: Oracle (Email Server and
Collaboration
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes.
Depending on the size / number of messages: how about using rsync and
OpenBSD's CARP?
True, it will not be realtime, but the
Nico Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes.
Depending on the size / number of messages: how about using rsync and
OpenBSD's CARP?
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nico Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
mailboxes.
Depending on the size / number of
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nico Meijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bill,
The other option is to take what appears to be the best IMAP server out
there (Cyrus) and figure out a way to do real-time mirroring of the
Bill Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
If you are running FreeBSD 5, you should be able to make a filesystem snapshot
and rsync from there.
I suppose I should have commented on that ;)
We're not running FreeBSD 5 on these production
Bill Moran wrote:
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are running FreeBSD 5, you should be able to make a filesystem snapshot
and rsync from there.
I suppose I should have commented on that ;)
We're not running FreeBSD 5 on these production machines yet ... but it's
likely we will be
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Christian Laursen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you are running FreeBSD 5, you should be able to make a filesystem snapshot
and rsync from there.
I suppose I should have commented on that ;)
We're not running FreeBSD 5 on
Bill Moran wrote:
David E. Meier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like I said, we'll never know till someone tries it. It looks like
Dovecot is going to try it eventually, but it seems like they have
other priorities at this time.
Someone already stores mails in a database: Oracle (Email Server and
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
[ I don't think that stuffing email into a database is a particularly good
idea since that means keeping large blobs of non-relational data floating
around, something that the filesystem can do a better job of handling... ]
Actually ... you got me
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Moran wrote:
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
The latter uses one-message-per-file, and ought to work *much* better both in
terms of performance and stability, and in terms of playing nice with the way
rsync wants to back things
Bill Moran wrote:
Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ I don't think that stuffing email into a database is a particularly good
idea since that means keeping large blobs of non-relational data floating
around, something that the filesystem can do a better job of handling... ]
[ ... ]
During
Just a thought, but couldn't you write the imapd process to act more
like a web application server in the RDBMS scenario. You can cache
data and limit the number of select statements executed on the actual
data store. Although one wouldn't have something like cookies for
sessions, the
18 matches
Mail list logo
