From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 24 17:04:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A33B16A4E6 for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:04:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mikhailg@webanoide.org) Received: from overlord.navalradio.cl (overlord.navalradio.cl [201.236.67.146]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0446343D4C for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:04:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mikhailg@webanoide.org) Received: from [10.0.0.7] (ppp111-84.lns1.hba1.internode.on.net [150.101.111.84]) (authenticated bits=0) by overlord.navalradio.cl (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6OH4Wwj017702; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:04:36 -0400 (CLT) (envelope-from mikhailg@webanoide.org) Message-ID: <44C4FD95.8080308@webanoide.org> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 03:04:21 +1000 From: Mikhail Goriachev Organization: Webanoide User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Macintosh/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Moran References: <20060722054711.9B5B.GERARD@seibercom.net> <005601c6ad8c$81193f60$0200a8c0@satellite> <44C31024.6070002@webanoide.org> <20060723082433.0f15744d.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> In-Reply-To: <20060723082433.0f15744d.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-98.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=no version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on overlord.navalradio.cl Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mail system Suggestions X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:04:58 -0000 Bill Moran wrote: > > I don't know enought about Dovecot in particular to say whether or not > the speed is _purely_ the result of caching (and being written in C). > > But I can state a couple of reasons why the server-side cache helps. > Keep in mind that IMAP is specifically designed as a clieng/server > protocol. I generally have the same mailbox open from three computers: > my home, my work and my laptop. When changes are made from one of these, > the other two need to get synchronized. Like most people, I try to > keep my mails organized into folders that don't get too big, but I still > end up with 1000s of mails in each folder. > > Dovecot keeping a cache/index on the server side allows Dovecot to quickly > provide information when the clients want to sync up. When a mail client > is first started, it needs to do the equivalent of "send me a list of all > the emails in this folder". If Dovecot needs to scan each and every message, > it can be pretty slow, but if it has an index maintained that it can more > or less just ship as is, that's much faster. How often these types of > "overall sync" operations occur under normal usage, I don't know. > > While I'm not an expert, I believe that Courier maintains indexes as well. > Fair enough, thanks for your thoughts. I guess I'll give dovecot a spin when the right time comes (apparently it's still in beta). Meanwhile I'll stick with courier-imap. Cheers, Mikhail. -- Mikhail Goriachev Webanoide Telephone: +61 (0)3 62252501 Mobile Phone: +61 (0)4 38255158 E-Mail: mikhailg@webanoide.org Web: http://www.webanoide.org PGP Key ID: 0x4E148A3B PGP Key Fingerprint: D96B 7C14 79A5 8824 B99D 9562 F50E 2F5D 4E14 8A3B