On Tue, 17 Jul 2018, Dan Lukes wrote:
On 17.7.2018 20:56, David B Funk wrote:
Not to mention, for years Mark Crispin adamantly opposed anything greater
than 32 bit code (for portability sake). So there may still be dark corners
of the UW/Panda IMAP code that will break on a 64 bit system.
According my experience, it's more stable om 64bit system. The "broken start
of mailbox" issue I mentioned has been so common issue I has been asked to
solve. With rise of 64B system it almost disappeared.
Just out of curiosity, any reason to stick with the "mbox" format?
There are others (EG: 1-file/message & MIX ) which don't have the size
limitation and have distinct performance advantages.
I can' withstand to answer you using your own footer:
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
Classic "UNIX" format used by most of MTA. It's de-facto standard. It's
simple and because its just text, it can be processed by simple tools
available on every system. And it can be read even with no tool at all.
Just remember the issue I described - broken mailbox can be corrected by just
text editor, or even automatically using sed.
For MBX I crafted own tool suitable to repair broken mailboxes. Even with
such tool I prefer standard UNIX format whenever possible (I fully agree with
you - standard is better).
For MIX no broken mailbox repair tool exists. I consider it unfinished work
I'm not ready to finish by self - as a result, I can't use it for production
deployment.
Finally, I hate 1-file/message format because large number of small messages
received will overload underlying filesystem (i-nodes are limited resource)
so I consider it so DoS prone.
Did I satisfied your curiosity ? ;-)
I've got MIX management/repair tools that Mark created in 2007:
/*
* Program: mix index conversion utility
*
* Author: Mark Crispin
* Networks and Distributed Computing
* Computing & Communications
* University of Washington
* Administration Building, AG-44
* Seattle, WA 98195
* Internet: m...@cac.washington.edu
*
* Date: 9 April 2007
* Last Edited: 9 November 2007
*/
/*
* Program: mix data file rebuild utility
*
* Author: Mark Crispin
* Networks and Distributed Computing
* Computing & Communications
* University of Washington
* Administration Building, AG-44
* Seattle, WA 98195
* Internet: m...@cac.washington.edu
*
* Date: 14 May 2007
* Last Edited: 14 May 2007
*/
We've been using MIX in production for 10 years now.
I started using it while Mark was beta-testing, found & reported bugs etc.
We've got users with MIX mailboxes with 10s of GB in size, 100's thousands of
messages.
There's been a few cases of corruption problems but in general far better than
mbox. (performance both for user experience & system level backups).
People who actually know me know that sig line is sarcasm, and in any
case that "B{" is not a smile-face.
As somebody who cut their eye-teeth on Bell-Labs system 3 Unix running on a
PDP-11/45 in 1977, I know what "Classical" Unix is, and how much things have
changed/improved.
--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{
_______________________________________________
Imap-uw mailing list
Imap-uw@u.washington.edu
http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
