[Dovecot] Zimbra benchmarking

[Timo Sirainen]

On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 12:00 +0100, DINH Viêt Hoà wrote:
> On Nov 30, 2007 11:38 AM, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote:
> > Zimbra is apparently building full text search indexes while appending,
> > so this test doesn't mean much until I can test Dovecot's performance
> > with Squat indexing.
> 
> Hello, in fact, I'm not that much convinced by full-text search index
> server side.
> We consider response time, server side full text search will include
> client-server round-trip.
> So that, for example, on etpanX, I do some local indexing on the imap
> folders, so that when the user does a search, it's given in a fraction
> of second even if the server is slow.
> I think Mail.app on Mac OS X is doing the same.

Yes, and so do many other clients. But FTS indexes are useful for
webmails, mobile clients and other clients that don't have a local
cache.

Squat indexes are going to work so that the first time you do a TEXT or
BODY search the indexes are built for the mailbox. After that they most
likely are updated when saving new mails (although maybe only with
deliver, not with APPEND/COPY?). If user hasn't done any TEXT/BODY
searches for a month or so, the indexes finally get deleted. Or that's
my plan currently, those rules are easy to change.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20071130/8d7cdfd5/attachment.bin