[Dovecot] Scalability plans: Abstract out filesystem and make it someone else's problem

[Daniel L. Miller]

Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 18:18 -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>   
>> Oh BTW. I think dbmail 2.3 does that. Then again I haven't yet seen a
>> stable dbmail version. But looks like they've released 2.3.6 recently
>> that I haven't tested yet.
>>     
>
> Looks like it even does single instance header values:
>   
LOL - I started off hijacking this thread for SIS - and now you just 
invited the next one:  Have you done, or are you aware of, recent 
comparisons between Dovecot & dbmail?  I'd like to think Dovecot is 
faster, more stable, more feature-rich, and less fattening...

I don't WANT dbmail!
>   
>> The header caching tables used since 2.2 have been replaced with a new
>> schema, optimized for a much smaller storage footprint, and therefor
>> faster access. Headers are now cached using a single-instance storage
>> pattern, similar to the one used for the message parts. This change
>> also introduces for the first time the appearance of views in the
>> database, which is somewhat experimental because of some uncertainties
>> with regard to the possible performance impact this may have.
>>     
>
> But somehow I think the performance isn't going to be very good for
> downloading the full header if it has to piece it together from lots of
> fields stored all around the database.
>   
Do you have performance concerns for what we've been discussing for SIS 
in Dovecot?

We can spin off some other threads if you'd prefer to return to your 
original question - but I guess the question on everybody's (well, at 
least mine) mind right now is will YOU try to implement SIS in the near 
future?  Regardless of the backend used?

-- 
Daniel