On Tue, 20 Jan 2026 14:05:10 -0800 Ron <[email protected]> wrote: > A DB makes most sense for email messages - index-able, ACID > compliance (depending on DB), fast, etc.
Databases are the WORST possible way to store arbitrary files. Microsoft tried to make a database-backed filesystem. They tried very hard. They failed so badly at it they abandoned WinFS. And they had previously built Microsoft Exchange on databases anyway. They didn't do it because it was a good idea (it isn't). They did it because NTFS was *worse*. NTFS is notoriously rubbish with large numbers of small files. Throwing all of it into a MS SQL Server database was an "easy" way to get acceptable performance. > when a message is marked "Read", the *file name* is changed to > reflect the change in status! It's efficient, consuming one byte of RAM when referenced and zero RAM when not, and consuming zero space on the filesystem depending on how it stores metadata. It's fast, faster than any database could ever hope to be on the same filesystem. It's Atomic and Consistent, and it's as Isolated and Durable as anything on the filesystem can possibly be. ACID without any of the overhead of running a database server. It's brilliant in its simplicity. > Designed to be *fast* at up-to a couple hundred terabytes. Designed to compete with Microsoft Exchange on Windows, more like. Stalwart runs on Windows which means it needs to perform acceptably on NTFS, and the "easy" way to do that is throw it all in a big ol' database. -- \m/ (--) \m/ _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
