Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-12 Thread Robert Mueller
I'm using ext3 with dir_hash. I considered using XFS, but there are a lot of benchmarks that show that XFS is not faster in general, also the XFS development seems to be stucked at the moment and from my own experience as well as from other people in a recent thread on this mailinglist there

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-09 Thread Marten Lehmann
Hello, I did play with ext2 dir_hash, but didn't find it helping me much (it would help lookups sometimes, but slowed file creation significantly on my tests). I've also heard people praise reiserfs for it's performance under these conditions (personally I don't trust it, but some of that is

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-09 Thread Chris Smith
On Thursday 09 November 2006 02:02, Paul Dekkers wrote: > So maybe you're indeed facing the quality of your IMAP client That can be a lot of it. I run a cyrus mail store on my local network and as much as I like Kmail it is painfully slow opening folders with a lot of messages (I have one with ~

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-09 Thread David Carter
On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Marten Lehmann wrote: That was merged a long time back. doc/text/changes: is it enabled by default? Or do I have to specify which headers in particular shall be cached? It is enabled by default, but only applies to messages delivered after you started to run 2.2.1 or lat

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Paul Dekkers
Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: > -- Marten Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on 8. > November 2006 17:02:52 +0100 regarding performance on large inboxes: > >> from time to time we have users with a very large inbox, which means it >> contains 20.000 mess

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Marten Lehmann
Hello, That was merged a long time back. doc/text/changes: is it enabled by default? Or do I have to specify which headers in particular shall be cached? We are using 2.2.12, so then the patch be already included. Regards Marten Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wik

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Phil Pennock
On 2006-11-08 at 22:04 +, David Carter wrote: > On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Phil Pennock wrote: > >The relevant stuff is HERMES_CACHE_MOST in mailbox.c; I've really no > >idea whether or not these changes are roughly independent and if they > >can be pulled out. > > That was merged a long time back. d

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread David Carter
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Phil Pennock wrote: The relevant stuff is HERMES_CACHE_MOST in mailbox.c; I've really no idea whether or not these changes are roughly independent and if they can be pulled out. That was merged a long time back. doc/text/changes: Changes to the Cyrus IMAP Server since 2.2.

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Phil Pennock
On 2006-11-08 at 21:58 +0100, Marten Lehmann wrote: > I think it would be a really great performance boost if cyrus would > cache all headers (I think that is what dovecot does and is very fast > with it) so it doesn't have to touch the files. Where have you seen such > patches? Under http://ww

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Marten Lehmann
Hello, What is fetched depends upon the client software and what it asks for. yes, but that may very extremely. If Cyrus only caches lets say "X-Spam" and there is no such header in the email and thus not in the cache, will Cyrus look into the file then? Or will the cache contain an empty he

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Sebastian Hagedorn
-- Marten Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is rumored to have mumbled on 8. November 2006 17:02:52 +0100 regarding performance on large inboxes: from time to time we have users with a very large inbox, which means it contains 20.000 messages or even more. My quite general question is: What is

Re: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Phil Pennock
On 2006-11-08 at 17:02 +0100, Marten Lehmann wrote: > from time to time we have users with a very large inbox, which means it > contains 20.000 messages or even more. My quite general question is: > What is cyrus doing once a user logs in through imap or pop3? It seems, > that it is parsing the

RE: performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Ciprian Marius Vizitiu
from time to time we have users with a very large inbox, which means it contains 20.000 messages or even more. My quite general question is: What is cyrus doing once a user logs in through imap or pop3? It seems, that it is parsing the directory, which takes very long. But what does it have the i

performance on large inboxes

2006-11-08 Thread Marten Lehmann
Hello, from time to time we have users with a very large inbox, which means it contains 20.000 messages or even more. My quite general question is: What is cyrus doing once a user logs in through imap or pop3? It seems, that it is parsing the directory, which takes very long. But what does it