[dovecot] Mbox spool; dovecot rewriting and rewriting and rewriting
Hi,
jaldhar recommended dovecot to me - http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/archives/2003/04/07/000286.html ... and so far it seems much nicer than the other imapds. yay.
I use the OS X Mail.app client. I tested it with a test account with no problems, but trying to use it with my usual mail folders (~1.3GB; 120MB in the inbox) it's not working at all.
It seems like dovecot keeps copying the full inbox into a temp file in mail/.imap/INBOX. It did it at least 10 times while I was watching without any noticable progress doing anything at all in Mail.app.
I am running FreeBSD on an ancient box with 384MB ram (but nice SCSI drives).
I tried stopping new mail deliveries to the inbox while I testing, but it didn't seem to make a difference.
- ask
-- ask bjoern hansen, http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ !try; do();
On Mon, 2003-04-07 at 20:47, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
I use the OS X Mail.app client. I tested it with a test account with no problems, but trying to use it with my usual mail folders (~1.3GB; 120MB in the inbox) it's not working at all.
It seems like dovecot keeps copying the full inbox into a temp file in mail/.imap/INBOX. It did it at least 10 times while I was watching without any noticable progress doing anything at all in Mail.app.
That sounds like Mail.app is creating new custom flags. What does X-IMAPbase header look like in the first mail?
Anyway, rewriting isn't too well optimized yet. It's a bit better in CVS now and I think I could make it a bit more better for the next release (which might be good enough for most), but "optimal" rewriting requires a bit larger changes.
I tried stopping new mail deliveries to the inbox while I testing, but it didn't seem to make a difference.
New mails shouldn't require rewriting, especially the whole file.
On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Timo Sirainen wrote:
On Mon, 2003-04-07 at 20:47, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
I use the OS X Mail.app client. I tested it with a test account with no problems, but trying to use it with my usual mail folders (~1.3GB; 120MB in the inbox) it's not working at all.
It seems like dovecot keeps copying the full inbox into a temp file in mail/.imap/INBOX. It did it at least 10 times while I was watching without any noticable progress doing anything at all in Mail.app.
That sounds like Mail.app is creating new custom flags. What does X-IMAPbase header look like in the first mail?
Ah, yes. It keep track of the "Junk" status.
X-IMAPbase: 1049736224 0 NotJunk Junk
Anyway, rewriting isn't too well optimized yet. It's a bit better in CVS now and I think I could make it a bit more better for the next release (which might be good enough for most), but "optimal" rewriting requires a bit larger changes.
So for every mail read it rewrites the 120MB file? Ouch. No wonder it's a bit slow. ;-)
- ask
-- ask bjoern hansen, http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ !try; do();
On Tue, 2003-04-08 at 01:38, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
That sounds like Mail.app is creating new custom flags. What does X-IMAPbase header look like in the first mail?
Ah, yes. It keep track of the "Junk" status.
X-IMAPbase: 1049736224 0 NotJunk Junk
Hmm. Maybe it then starts scanning the mails from beginning and setting the flags one by one?
Anyway, rewriting isn't too well optimized yet. It's a bit better in CVS now and I think I could make it a bit more better for the next release (which might be good enough for most), but "optimal" rewriting requires a bit larger changes.
So for every mail read it rewrites the 120MB file? Ouch. No wonder it's a bit slow. ;-)
Not whole file, but all mails after the one it modifies. So updating new mails should be pretty fast.
CVS already writes some extra empty space between mails, but it's not smart enough yet to use it for inserted headers.
On Monday, Apr 7, 2003, at 16:12 America/Los_Angeles, Timo Sirainen wrote:
X-IMAPbase: 1049736224 0 NotJunk Junk
Hmm. Maybe it then starts scanning the mails from beginning and setting the flags one by one?
Yes, it seems like it.
So for every mail read it rewrites the 120MB file? Ouch. No wonder it's a bit slow. ;-)
Not whole file, but all mails after the one it modifies. So updating new mails should be pretty fast.
CVS already writes some extra empty space between mails, but it's not smart enough yet to use it for inserted headers.
It sounds like adding that will fix the issue for me; I'll try dovecot again when it's there. Thanks!
For now I got imap-uw to not suck quite as much as it did first; thanks Jonas!
- ask
participants (2)
-
Ask Bjoern Hansen
-
Timo Sirainen