<quote who="Paul Elliott"> > >> On Tue, Apr 06, 2004 at 10:44:16PM -0700, Avery Day wrote: >>> Does anyone think going completely webmail based using squirrelmail for >>> the MUA is a bad idea? Does anyone have any thoughts on this at all? Is >>> there anyone in this mailing list that has done this before? If so I >>> would >>> love to hear about how it has worked out. >> We've done this. We encountered incredible hostility from a small >> minority, resentment or resignation from a larger minority, positive >> feedback from a significant minority. > > Us too. We used to use a free system called Mercury but it was hugely > unpopular due to speed/reliability. We now use Qmail/Courier and > SquirrelMail as our only supported MUA. We currently have 5000 users and > it works like a charm. > >> You'll need to examine what they can currently do with their mail >> clients and be able to offer similar functions or workarounds. One >> major lack in Squirrel is multiple address books. I have solved this by >> patching Squirrel to consult a table (we use database storage for > <snip> > > We had similar issues. I took the same route as yourself, patching and > adding features as requested. > >> As for your hardware, I'd recommend going dual processor. Frees up a >> lot of bottlenecks. Put the IMAP mailstore and SquirrelMail on >> different servers and (if you can) put an extra NIC in both machines and >> give them a dedicated link on a special subnet. > > I would definetely agree here. We have a single Xeon CPU at the moment > (3Ghz) but it does struggle a little at times (when performing large mail > shots.) I've also found, for us at least, memory is also an issue. We > currently have 512 and the server now and again goes into swap due to the > sheer amount of concurrent users. We're adding another 512 next week so it > should solve that problem. :-) > > --- > Paul Elliott, Network Technician > Bishop Burton College (01964) 553000 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system > administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click > -- > squirrelmail-users mailing list > List Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > List Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=2995 > List Info: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users > >
Wow 5000 users on this one little machine with only 512 memory. If I had to take a guess I would say to add 2 or maybe even 3 gigs of ram to this machine. Probly just adding more ram alone will solve alot of your problems. I am finding with this server that squirrelmail is pushing out its webpages faster than the client computer can handle it. I notice on the client computers when using SM that the cpu shoots up to 100% for a second or 2 like its getting bombarded with more information than it can handle. Or maybe this is becuse IE just cant handle it. I might try using firebird and see if I get the same results. Well if your server can handle 5000 users mine can sure handle 35 users no problem. this server never even brakes a sweat when I hit the showall in a mailbox that has say 500 emails in it. I am more woried about if the network can handle this sort of trafic more than anything. Thanks for the info. -- Avery ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click -- squirrelmail-users mailing list List Address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=2995 List Info: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users
