cyrus vs UW imap
tsh at mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk
Fri Aug 26 18:13:07 UTC 2005
>On Fri, 2005-08-26 at 11:57 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
>> Craig White wrote:
>> > FWIW - I didn't realize how much of a performance dog uw-imap was until
>> > I installed cyrus-imapd - and this was on my own mail server where I am
>> > the only user.
>> What kinds of tasks were dog slow? Could it be because your mailboxes
>> were in the default compatible-but-horribly-slow mbox format?
>yes indeedy - default compatible-but-horribly-slow mbox format would be
>an accurate description.
I'm interested in your experience with this.
Do you have any kind of statistics? How big is your mailbox,
how many messages in it, and how long did it take to display them?
I know its all a bit subjective, but we have recently had
issues about mail-response and switching to cyrus-imap
was discussed. However, when I looked in more detail
at what was going on, I found many of our 700 users with
all their mail in the mail spool, others with Gigabyte inboxes
on their home disks and suchlike. When we addressed these
issues, mail response improved dramatically, even with the
compatible-but-horribly-slow mbox format (which we maintain
partly because of inertiia and partly because many users
want to read their mail with different mailers depending
where they are)
>fedora-list mailing list
>fedora-list at redhat.com
>To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
More information about the users