David, On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 05:09:31PM -0600, David Champion wrote: > * On 2004.01.20, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > * "Clifton Royston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Usually this kind of overload is due to many users having large > > mailboxes (e.g. 30MB and up) in the old UNIX mbox format. In this > > I've been putting off a reply to see what others say, but I might > as well go ahead with mentioning that if it does seem to be a high > user-load problem, or if that seems like a good-enough temporary > solution, you might want to take a look at how we reduced that at my > site: > > http://home.uchicago.edu/~dgc/sw/qpopper/index.html
thanks for your feedback, we've been thinking about implemting this earlier so i will probably give it a try and test it. but i do know already i'll have at least 2 issues. 1. we're using multiple servers (4), users which are in the listed in the reserved memory segment on machine A will still be able to pop on machine B. although i can think of a way to avoid this, i can use persistency in the loadbalancing to make sure a user is always directed to the same popserver within a certain timeframe. but this also reduces the load balancing effect and redundancy, but it might not be too bad. 2. happymail can add additional wait time based on the size of the mailbox. i can see how this can be done with a standard qpopper because all mail is in one file so stat'ing the mbox file will do the trick. but when using maildir, every message is a file and i don't think qpopper will be returning the total size of the mailbox but i don't know this for sure. perhaps TLP will be able to answer this right away. bart --
