[Dovecot] Which FTS to use!

[Henrique Santos Fernandes]

So i guess  i will just stay with squat until i upgrade to 2.1 and then
move to solr..

And make the cron update daily for active users!

Thanks a lot!
[]'sf.rique


On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote:

> 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