[Dovecot] Which FTS to use!

[Timo Sirainen]

On 25.11.2011, at 17.29, Henrique Santos Fernandes wrote:

> Hello, i am currently using squat dovecot, but some users that have lots os
> emails ( 1GB ) are complaining about speed.
> Iam using dovecot 2.0.13 on debian 6
> 
> my squat conf is
> plugin {
>  fts = squat
>  fts_squat = partial=4 full=5
> }
> 
> I am thinking in maybe start to use Solr, so any one can help me with an
> decision?

With v2.0 Solr is the only other choice.

> I am probably gonna update dovecot to 2.1 next year. and them maybe change
> the FTS plugin.

With v2.1 Lucene is another possibility, and it's somewhat easier to install than Solr. Also v2.1's Solr backend is improved, so I wouldn't really recommend spending a lot of time and disk I/O on v2.0's Solr since you'll need to rebuild the index anyway in v2.1 (or keep using "solr_old" backend with some missing featues).

> This year i will get 10k disk only to store the dovecot index, rigth now
> they are saved on the same storage that the mails are and also change  the
> "full" parameter to something  like 10 or 15 I know i will use more disk
> space for it, but it will make a lot of differences right? it will match
> the message without  the need of opening it for any search smaller than 10
> character i guess.
> 
> 
> But this will be enough? or Solr or Lucene still better?

The main problem with Squat is its index updating performance, which sucks.

> Anyway, i am not current updating the indexes automatic, but i am planing
> on it, just not sure what is better, the command doveadm index or doveadm
> search... with one is better to do the task?

doveadm index