I have to second, third, and fourth that. We moved from Courier to Dovecot and
the performance change was dramatic. We have 5,000+ accounts on 2 clustered
(active / active) servers utilizing GFS for the file system on a SAS SAN and
the fact that Dovecot had built in support for clustered setups was a major
plus. Had a few issues off the bat with POP3 UID's but quickly fixed that one
thanks to Dovecots easy to change UID definitions. Don't think I'll ever
From: Rick Romero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:08:54 -0600
Conversation: [vchkpw] [OT] IMAP Servers: Dovecot or Binc?
Subject: Re: [vchkpw] [OT] IMAP Servers: Dovecot or Binc?
On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 11:11 -0800, Tom Collins wrote:
> Courier-IMAP seems to be putting a heavy load on my server when
> someone accesses a mailbox with a large number of messages in it.
> What's the preferred IMAP server for a machine that will have 100-200
> connections (plan for growth...) but may have an occasional mailbox
> with 1000+ messages in it. I've searched the archives and tried to
> google for "imap server performance" and "imap server comparison" but
> haven't come up with much after an hour.
> My impression is that Dovecot performs well, better than courier, but
> I'm wondering if anyone can offer up some real-world numbers to help
> me make my decision.
Dovecot has really come out in the past year or so. I started with .99,
I upgraded from Courier, but honestly it wasn't really up to date.
Dovecot's indexing showed an immediate improvement on large mailboxes.
With 1.0.5, the only issue I have is with a few older Mac clients. For
me this affects about 4 out of 450 clients total.
I don't have any numbers, but I've had at least 1500 messages in my
INBOX, not including subfolders, with great performance. The change was
so dramatic I didn't need any numbers.