<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Geo Carncross wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid1149624222.18248.56.camel@midget.intranet"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 08:25 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'm suggesting it in addition to MBOX and MAILDIR. And of course if
there's a MySQL version then other databases will follow. Just seems to
me that if I were running a really BIG email operation that MySQL could
have some serious benefits.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Using a "big ol' SQL database" will ALWAYS give _worse performance_ than
a specialized solution (like dbox), and will usually give _worse
performance_ than a naive but still specialized solution (like maildir
or mbox).
</pre>
</blockquote>
Not true for "always". If you have 100,000 messages in a folder the
database will win easy.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid1149624222.18248.56.camel@midget.intranet"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
SQL's strengths are mutability, not performance- regardless of what you
or others might think. USUALLY the database performance is "good enough"
for most applications- but that doesn't mean it's even remotely close to
optimal.
</pre>
</blockquote>
If you have a large system then what you might want is power and if you
want speed you just spend more money for faster hardware.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid1149624222.18248.56.camel@midget.intranet"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Nevertheless, DBMail exists- it's an SQL backed IMAP server, and its
active- and supports MySQL (in addition to SQLite and PostgreSQL).
</pre>
</blockquote>
I'd like to see Dovecot have that option as well.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>