On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Dave O wrote:
>
> 2 level hashing would work, but I don't know if Cyrus supports that. It
> would most likely be trivial to implement.
>
> eg spool/s/sm/user/smith
spool/s/m/user/smith?
ian
Dave O wrote:
2 level hashing would work, but I don't know if Cyrus supports that. It
would most likely be trivial to implement.
eg spool/s/sm/user/smith
Or in the case of full dir hashing, have a second hash function and hash
the names that get assigned to one bin into an additional set of b
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 10:42:39 -0500 (EST)
Dave O <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 2 level hashing would work, but I don't know if Cyrus supports that. It
> would most likely be trivial to implement.
>
> eg spool/s/sm/user/smith
Yes, i was thinking about that too ... In fact i would prefer it over
2 level hashing would work, but I don't know if Cyrus supports that. It
would most likely be trivial to implement.
eg spool/s/sm/user/smith
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Jure Pecar wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Recently i was testing a 2.2 branch on linux with Veritas vxfs. I wanted to
> create 20 users
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Jure Pecar wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Recently i was testing a 2.2 branch on linux with Veritas vxfs. I wanted to
> create 20 users in the form of userN, where n is 1..20. I soon found
> out that vxfs won't let me create more than 32k subdirs in one dir.
>
> This is clear
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Should be enough users for a single spool, don't ya think? Cyrus Murder
> might fix your problem, though, if you don't mind multiple imapd instances
> (in multiple boxes if at all possible).
If the problem is just number of users on one b
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003, Jure Pecar wrote:
> This is clearly a limitation of the filesystem. How does other filesystems
> handle this?
I have a XFS dir with more than 40k objects, and it still performs okay...
but I had some not-so-nice words with the people involved and told them to
learn about hash
Hi!
Yes, and ext2/3 has the same limitation.
Ext2/3 code in the Linux kernel can be modified (one line) and
recompiled to allow more directories, up to cca. 65000.
ReiserFS is known not to have this limitation, if I'm right.
But the solution should be a (configurable) more scalable hashing
m
