David Lang wrote:
>(..)
I was recently doing some testing of lots of small files on the various
filesystems, and I ran into a huge difference (8x) depending on what
allocator was used for ext*. the default allocator changed between ext2
and ext3 (you can override it as a mount option) and when
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Sergio Devojno Bruder wrote:
David Lang wrote:
(..)
I was recently doing some testing of lots of small files on the various
filesystems, and I ran into a huge difference (8x) depending on what
allocator was used for ext*. the default allocator changed between ext2 and
ext
Michael Loftis wrote:
Interesting ... can you provide some numbers, even from memory?
I'd also be VERY interested since our experience was quite the opposite.
ReiserFS was faster than all three, XFS trailing a dismal third (also
had corruption issues) and ext3 second or even more dismal thir
> >> In our experience FS-wise, ReiserFS is the worst performer between ext3,
> >> XFS e ReiserFS (with tailBLAH turned on or off) for a Cyrus Backend (>1M
> >> mailboxes in 3 partitions per backend, 0.5TB each partition).
> >
> > Interesting ... can you provide some numbers, even from memory?
>
>
Hello,
I can login as cyrus admin, create user account
and folders.
But how to subscrib the folders?
seems cyradm and its provided
/Cyrus/IMAP/Admin.pm doesn't have this command.
Thanks
PT
Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus
Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu
I'm running Cyrus imapd in a Kerberos environment.
When using cyradm, I would like to authenticate with a /admin
instance, rather than giving my primary instance admin privileges or
always connecting as the 'cyrus' user. I haven't had much luck so
far, and I think it's because I'm not clear on ho
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Jure Pe?ar wrote:
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:20:03 -0800 (PST)
Andrew Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
mkfs -t ext3 -j -m 1 -O dir_index /dev/sdb1
tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/sdb1
What about 1k blocks? I think they'd be more useful than 4k on mail
spools ...
I was recently doing
On Mon, 7 Nov 2005, Jure [ISO-8859-2] Pe?ar wrote:
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:20:03 -0800 (PST)
Andrew Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
mkfs -t ext3 -j -m 1 -O dir_index /dev/sdb1
tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/sdb1
What about 1k blocks? I think they'd be more useful than 4k on mail
spools ...
Maybe,
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:20:03 -0800 (PST)
Andrew Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mkfs -t ext3 -j -m 1 -O dir_index /dev/sdb1
> tune2fs -c 0 -i 0 /dev/sdb1
What about 1k blocks? I think they'd be more useful than 4k on mail
spools ...
--
Jure Pečar
http://jure.pecar.org/
Cyrus Home Page
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005, Michael Loftis wrote:
I'd also be VERY interested since our experience was quite the opposite.
ReiserFS was faster than all three, XFS trailing a dismal third (also had
corruption issues) and ext3 second or even more dismal third, depending on if
you ignored it's wretched
--On November 6, 2005 12:51:33 PM +0100 Jure Pečar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 03:58:15 -0200
Sergio Devojno Bruder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In our experience FS-wise, ReiserFS is the worst performer between ext3,
XFS e ReiserFS (with tailBLAH turned on or off) for a C
> On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 03:58:15 -0200
> Sergio Devojno Bruder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In our experience FS-wise, ReiserFS is the worst performer between ext3,
>> XFS e ReiserFS (with tailBLAH turned on or off) for a Cyrus Backend (>1M
>> mailboxes in 3 partitions per backend, 0.5TB each part
Jure Pečar wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 03:58:15 -0200
Sergio Devojno Bruder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In our experience FS-wise, ReiserFS is the worst performer between ext3,
XFS e ReiserFS (with tailBLAH turned on or off) for a Cyrus Backend (>1M
mailboxes in 3 partitions per backend, 0.5TB e
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 03:58:15 -0200
Sergio Devojno Bruder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In our experience FS-wise, ReiserFS is the worst performer between ext3,
> XFS e ReiserFS (with tailBLAH turned on or off) for a Cyrus Backend (>1M
> mailboxes in 3 partitions per backend, 0.5TB each partition)
14 matches
Mail list logo
