Re: [Dovecot] dbox benchmarks

2009-04-03 Thread Felix SchŸueren
Timo Sirainen wrote: On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:08 PM, Daniel L. Miller wrote: I can see where large mailservers would benefit from significant write performance increases - but unless the server is being actively limited by the local delivery agent, what other performance benefits does this

Re: [Dovecot] dbox benchmarks

2009-04-02 Thread Daniel L. Miller
I can see where large mailservers would benefit from significant write performance increases - but unless the server is being actively limited by the local delivery agent, what other performance benefits does this offer? In particular, is there any increase in READ performance by using dbox?

Re: [Dovecot] dbox benchmarks

2009-04-02 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Apr 2, 2009, at 10:08 PM, Daniel L. Miller wrote: I can see where large mailservers would benefit from significant write performance increases - but unless the server is being actively limited by the local delivery agent, what other performance benefits does this offer? In particular,

[Dovecot] dbox benchmarks

2009-03-30 Thread Timo Sirainen
http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-dbox-redesign/ Looks like multi-dbox scales pretty nicely. Even after 100k messages the peak saved msgs/sec is the same as the initial saved msgs/sec, even if the average slows down somewhat. I tested this by first deleting mailbox, then running imaptest for a

Re: [Dovecot] dbox benchmarks

2009-03-30 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 18:26 -0400, Timo Sirainen wrote: maildir: ~330 - ~110 msgs/sec, 9789 msgs/60 sec With maildir_very_dirty_syncs=yes (just committed to v1.2 hg): ~1100 - ~110 msgs/sec, 11904 msgs/60 sec. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part