Timothy Meader wrote:
Wait, so are you saying that on a single system, with 5000 users, that
dovecot's POP3 implementation was even faster than qpopper in server
mode? If this is true, I might consider switching our POP servers here
on center (funnily enough, the same NASA center that an earlier
responder to this thread works at) to an all dovecot implementation
instead of a hybrid qpopper 4.1/dovecot beta 8 (which incidently has
been working fine). There's 3 boxes with roughly 2000 on each.
Yes that's correct, we were running qpopper in server mode with
fast-update, etc. And not just a little faster, much faster. The system
load avg went from 3 or 4 down to 1 and has stayed there with dovecot.
We have mailboxes ranging in size from 0 to 100mb, with lots of mail
left on the server. Dovecot handles about 10,000 pops an hour. The speed
is due to the indexed mboxes, caching and less i/o. However, dovecot
works a bit differently and isn't rfc compliant out of the box, so there
are some trade-offs.
One notable trade-off with pop3, is that dovecot doesn't copy the file
to a temp drop like qpopper does, so there's less i/o. But, by default,
session locking is off, so 2 users can simultaneously pop the same mbox,
which isn't a good thing sometimes :-\. If you turn on session locking
(which is part of the rfc for pop3), you can get into problems with your
LDA processes waiting for Dovecot to release a lock on the mbox file if
a client leaves a pop3 session open a long time. You can tweak timeouts
in dovecot to work around this though. Obviously, you have to make sure
all clients and your LDA are using compatible locks.
Ken
Pacific.Net
Thanks in advance.
At 11:16 AM 6/2/2006, Ken A wrote:
Obantec Support wrote:
Hi Ken
I cannot live with the file .lock problem beta8 is supposed to fix
but so
far Timo has not come up with a reason for beta8 not running on my mail
server.
if he can resolve the issue then i will stay with dovecot as its
easier to
have the 1 system set-up. I currently only have around 200 mbox POP3
users.
We'd used qpopper for 9 years, and had very few problems with it. It
logs some spurious errors now and then that generate questions on this
list, but the answer is usually 'read the faq'. 200 mbox users should
be a perfect fit for qpopper.
Ken
Pacific.Net
Mark
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Subscribers of Qpopper" <qpopper@lists.pensive.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: replacing dovecot POP3 with qpopper (1st post)
Just went the other way, and won't be back to qpopper unless it gets
indexed mboxes. I still like qpopper, but it's just too slow for > 5000
users on a single box. Even with all the speed tweaks you can do with
qpopper, with lots of users leaving mail on the server, dovecot is much
faster and has been very reliable - so far!
Ken A
Pacific.Net
Obantec Support wrote:
Hi
i am having lots of problems with dovecot as a POP3 server with file
locking
and the latest beta8 that is supposed to cure this will not run on my
live
servers but is fine on a test box.
just built qpopper 4.0.8 on the test box and it seems fine. has anyone
turned off POP3 in dovecot and used qpopper as their POP3 server?
Mark
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/353 - Release Date:
31/05/2006
---
Tim Meader
CNE Internet Services
NetCommerce Corporation
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(301) 286-8013
