On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 12:11 -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote: > On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 10:14 -0400, Jonathan Siegle wrote: > > On Jun 3, 2009, at 9:35 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 09:31 -0400, Jonathan Siegle wrote: > > >> Are you saying that multiple processes on the same folder(INBOX) on > > >> the same IMAP server can cause this collision as well? Is there a > > >> difference between running multiple processes on the same > > >> folder(INBOX) on multiple IMAP servers vs running multiple processes > > >> on the same folder on a single IMAP server? > > > > > > I don't know. That depends on how GPFS is implemented. > > > > > > > > > Pick a local filesystem, say ext3? > > But with ext3 you can't have multiple servers accessing the same > filesystem.
But of course there are no problems (well, some very rare random ones maybe) having multiple processes accessing the same mailbox on the same server. Ever since I wrote my imaptest tool (a few years ago?) I've been heavily stress testing multiple connections modifying the mailbox at the same time.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
