[Dovecot] Plan/Status of MBX support?

[Les Mikesell]

On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 10:35, Daniel Watts wrote:
> >   
> >>> Now the problem is, we have to use the tranditional mbox format with 
> >>> dovecot, as it does not support indexed mbox format, which makes 
> >>> deleting messages costly. Also the long-time file locking (due to the 
> >>> slow operation on the dovecot side) causes our MTA (exim, by the way) 
> >>> holds a huge queue. That drives up the system load to mad (load 
> >>> average above 500 is not unusual in our case).
> >>>
> >>>       
> >> sorry just have to ask - does your server actually WORK at loads of 500?
> >> What kind of usage have you got?
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > ever thought on maildir?
> >
> >   
> OP said he has - and the reason he wants MBX support is to support 
> writing and reading of LOTS of SMALL emails. maildir overhead from 
> creation of new files for each email, allegedly, makes it less efficient 
> than a single file MBX.

Unless, of course, you delete one of those small emails which
with mbox format involves copying the entire remaining content into
a temporary file and back or with mbox copying the subsequent
messages backwards to close the hole.  A filesystem that
is efficient at file creation (reiserfs/xfs) probably makes
more sense. 

--
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell at gmail.com