Re: [Dovecot] dbox support state
On Thu, December 21, 2006 11:24 am, Timo Sirainen tss@iki.fi said:
One optimization left for it would be to not store flags and keywords to the dbox files at all, but keep everything in index files. Once I get that implemented, I'll start benchmarking it. Of course the problem with that is that it relies on index files completely then.
With dbox, have you considered having one collection of dbox files per namespace, rather than one collection of dbox files per mailbox/folder, and then use indexes to track which emails belong to each mailbox/folder? This would drastically speed up copying between folders, because you'd just update the index rather than writing the copied email to a new dbox file.
Just a thought.
Bill
On Thu, 2006-12-21 at 12:09 -0500, Bill Boebel wrote:
On Thu, December 21, 2006 11:24 am, Timo Sirainen tss@iki.fi said:
One optimization left for it would be to not store flags and keywords to the dbox files at all, but keep everything in index files. Once I get that implemented, I'll start benchmarking it. Of course the problem with that is that it relies on index files completely then.
With dbox, have you considered having one collection of dbox files per namespace, rather than one collection of dbox files per mailbox/folder, and then use indexes to track which emails belong to each mailbox/folder? This would drastically speed up copying between folders, because you'd just update the index rather than writing the copied email to a new dbox file.
Haven't thought about it before but yes, it would speed up copying a lot, since hardlink-copying isn't really possible with dbox.
Another thing that was kind of in TODO was an optional global attachment store, so people could send these company-wide 100MB attachments without the mail server dying.
participants (2)
-
Bill Boebel
-
Timo Sirainen