Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-18 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On 8/19/13, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 8/18/2013 12:16 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote: >> BTRFS and perhaps XFS are starting now to look at the >> internal-consistency assurance problem too finally (from what I read a >> month or so ago), due to necessity as we now hit multi-TiB >> filesystems. > The

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-18 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 8/18/2013 12:16 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > PS: My suggestion to use git as an email filesystem store was in jest. > ZFS however is a serious consideration for myself, for TiB+ size > filesystems at least. > BTRFS and perhaps XFS are starting now to look at the > internal-consistency assurance

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-18 Thread Kumar Appaiah
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 03:11:38PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On 8/18/13, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 02:52:05AM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > >> In GahNU, answer find you :) > >> > >> But you ought to do your bit and find duckduckgo while you're at it. > > > > I am doi

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-17 Thread Zenaan Harkness
PS: My suggestion to use git as an email filesystem store was in jest. ZFS however is a serious consideration for myself, for TiB+ size filesystems at least. BTRFS and perhaps XFS are starting now to look at the internal-consistency assurance problem too finally (from what I read a month or so ago)

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-17 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On 8/18/13, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 02:52:05AM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote: >> In GahNU, answer find you :) >> >> But you ought to do your bit and find duckduckgo while you're at it. > > I am doing some searching myself, but I did want some opinions from > the list. Thank y

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-17 Thread Kumar Appaiah
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 02:52:05AM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote: > In GahNU, answer find you :) > > But you ought to do your bit and find duckduckgo while you're at it. I am doing some searching myself, but I did want some opinions from the list. Thank you for sharing your opinions. Kumar -- Ap

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-17 Thread Kumar Appaiah
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 02:28:46PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > And of course the simple solution is to migrate to mbox. Maildir was > created for a single purpose: to eliminate file locking contention on > the traditional UNIX single mbox file. With tens of thousands of emails > this is obviou

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-17 Thread Stan Hoeppner
On 8/17/2013 9:01 AM, Kumar Appaiah wrote: >> 1. What is the best filesystem for Maildirs with several tens of >> thousands of messages? ... >> 3. What filesystem would allow quick file access? I'd like to be able >> to view the Maildirs in Mutt, and index and search it using >> notmuch. XFS is so

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-17 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On 8/18/13, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 09:59:57AM -0400, Kumar Appaiah wrote: ...storing email in single file... >> One approach I thought of is a loopback file. That makes things >> simpler, since I don't really have to repartition, and backing up is >> rather easy. So, here a

Re: Loopback filesystems for mail storage

2013-08-17 Thread Kumar Appaiah
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 09:59:57AM -0400, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > Hi. > > This may be slightly OT, but I hope people don't mind much. > > I'd like to come up with an efficient way to store and access my > e-mail using a loopback file, so I wanted some advice from experienced > people on the list.