Archiveopteryx

Posted Mar 19, 2010 22:58 UTC (Fri) by cras (guest, #7000)
In reply to: Archiveopteryx by paulj
Parent article: Archiveopteryx

Wonder if you were using some ancient Dovecot version, because typically people say that
switching from UW-IMAP to Dovecot increased their disk I/O performance by 10x or so with mbox.
But yes, mbox is kind of a second-class citizen there and it's possible you were just using a buggy
version.. There is also mbox_very_dirty_syncs=yes setting to make mbox much faster when it has
had external changes (although defaults are identical to UW-IMAP's behavior).

to post comments

Archiveopteryx

Posted Mar 20, 2010 3:17 UTC (Sat) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (1 responses)

Yeah, this was probably about 4 or 5 years ago - so some kind of 0.99
version i guess. I may try out dovecot again so when I next have time if you
think mbox performance should have improved and be on a par with UW-IMAP.

Archiveopteryx

Posted Mar 20, 2010 12:48 UTC (Sat) by cras (guest, #7000) [Link]

Yeah, v0.99 was pretty bad in all ways. All of the mail accessing and indexing code was redesigned
for v1.0. They could almost be thought of as different products..