[Dovecot] NFS performance and 1.1.3 - what can you (unofficially) get away with?

[Timo Sirainen]

On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 10:58 -0700, Jack Stewart wrote:
> The question is has anyone, with Maildir and the INDEX= on NFS (i.e. 
> dovecot.index and dovecot.index.cache, set mail_nfs_index to no. 

How much worse is the mail_nfs_index=yes? Last I heard it made hardly a
difference.

> If so, 
> was it better to turn maildir_copy_preserve_filename to on or did it 
> help to turn if off.

That shouldn't make a noticeable performance difference. If it's "yes"
it does one more uidlist lookup, but pretty much always the uidlist is
already in memory in any case so it doesn't matter.

> The other question is did you play with turning off 
> atime updates or changing the acmin* values?

Dovecot doesn't care about atimes, so feel free to disable them.

> I figure that the worst that can happen is that the dovecot.index.cache 
> file will become corrupt, and dovecot will then rebuild it.

It's not the worst that can happen, but index file errors are probably
more likely than other errors..

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20080910/a0fa1258/attachment.bin