Kolab with database IMAP server

[pj at websavages.com]

> On 22 Jan 2014, at 10:37, Sebastian Schlatow <buzz-dee at riseup.net> wrote:
> 
> Am 22.01.2014 11:25, schrieb Torsten Grote:
>> Hi Sebastian,
>> 
>> although you have not said it explicitly, I got the impression that the reason 
>> why you want to use DBMail is because you think that it provides better 
>> performance compared to file based IMAP servers.
>> 
>> Is that impression correct and if so, do you have evidence supporting this?
>> 
>> Kind Regards,
>> Torsten
>> 
>> On Wednesday 22 January 2014 11:19:12 Sebastian Schlatow wrote:
>>> IMAP ACL http://www.dbmail.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/shared-mbox and LDAP
>>> http://dbmail.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/ldap_authentication is supported by
>>> DBMail as far as I can see.
> Hi Torsten,
> 
> your impression is correct, but I don't know if it corresponds to the reality. I found a thread, where Dovecut is faster than DBMail.
> https://serverfault.com/questions/57833/fast-imap-server-for-larger-folders/
> http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2007-May/022599.html
> Also, it seems that the client is the bottleneck for searching 2 million mails in an IMAP shared folder. How could it be possible to do that in a fast way?
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.kolab.org
> https://lists.kolab.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Hi all, 

I had a play with dbmail (horde was the web front end) and it did not play nicely with activesync. Regarding performance I think it will be slower as you are adding an extra layer between the data coming in and getting stored on the physical disk. 

My $0.02 worth

Cheers PJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kolab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140122/26d1ab1a/attachment.html>