On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 16:58 -0700, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
On 6/24/2010 4:23 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
I'd recommend also installing and configuring imapproxy - it can be beneficial with squirrelmail.
Do you have any about a real world numbers about installation with and without imapproxy?
What, you want me to actually back up that statement with data?! Who do you think I am?! Never mind - don't answer that.
I know when I was playing web clients - particularly squirrelmail - there was a definite perceived improvement - but I never measured it.
Since every request (enter message, delete, forward, reply, etc etc etc) is a login -> action -> logout, it stands to reason on busy servers this will impact greatly, I saw a remarkable increase when using flat file years ago when changing to using imapproxy, but for many years now, using MySQL, it also was very noticeable improvement using it since it did not need to make all those extra concurrent requests.
If its running on a SOHO, you probably wouldn't even be able to measure the difference, but for an ISP/Telco or large institution, you will certainly notice the reduction in I/O (or loads on your database server). This goes for any imap webmail software, not just SM.
The advantage to this combination since about 2 months ago, the Squirrelmail team now also look after the imapproxy project :)
