Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-06 Thread Becky L. Sabino, LAN Administrator
> Becky L. Sabino, LAN Administrator wrote: > > Just FYI: > > > > > > I installed 1.5.1 and here were the results: > > > > > > 1.5.1 > > From the time I clicked login until folder list displayed 55 > > seconds From the time I clicked login until inbox messages displayed 4 > > min 44 seconds > > >

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Paul Lesneiwski
Trust me, he is not alone she. :) --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games. Get your fingers limbered up and give it your best shot. 4 great events, 4 opportunities to win big! Highest score wins.NEC IT Guy Games. Play to win an NE

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Marc Groot Koerkamp
Becky L. Sabino, LAN Administrator wrote: > Just FYI: > > > I installed 1.5.1 and here were the results: > > > 1.5.1 > From the time I clicked login until folder list displayed 55 > seconds From the time I clicked login until inbox messages displayed 4 > min 44 seconds > > 1.4.3 > From the time I

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Marc Groot Koerkamp
Chris Hilts wrote: >> Thanks for the quick reply, I'll give 1.5.1 a shot. Any >> guestimate on when it might be released as a stable version? Believe me, >> I >> would LOVE to switch to a different IMAP server, I've been begging to go >> to sendmail for years with no success. *sigh*. I'll let y

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Becky L. Sabino, LAN Administrator
Just FYI: I installed 1.5.1 and here were the results: 1.5.1 From the time I clicked login until folder list displayed 55 seconds From the time I clicked login until inbox messages displayed 4 min 44 seconds 1.4.3 From th

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Chris Hilts
> Thanks for the quick reply, I'll give 1.5.1 a shot. Any > guestimate on when it might be released as a stable version? Believe me, I > would LOVE to switch to a different IMAP server, I've been begging to go > to sendmail for years with no success. *sigh*. I'll let you know what > impact 1.5.1

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Tony Earnshaw
tir, 03.05.2005 kl. 20.16 skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > My configuration: > > SM v 1.4.4 > XAMPP 1.4.13 > Apache 2.0.53 > PHP 4.3.11 > MySQL 4.1.11 > eAccelerator 0.9.2a > running on Fedora Core 3 > hp proliant DL360 > 2GB RAM > intel xeon 3.6GHz CPU > > Our IMAP server is PMDF V6.2 runnin

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Becky L. Sabino, LAN Administrator
Thanks for the quick reply, I'll give 1.5.1 a shot. Any guestimate on when it might be released as a stable version? Believe me, I would LOVE to switch to a different IMAP server, I've been begging to go to sendmail for years with no success. *sigh*. I'll

Re: [SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread Marc Groot Koerkamp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > My configuration: > > > SM v 1.4.4 > XAMPP 1.4.13 > Apache 2.0.53 > PHP 4.3.11 > MySQL 4.1.11 > eAccelerator 0.9.2a running on Fedora Core 3 hp proliant DL360 2GB RAM > intel xeon 3.6GHz CPU > > Our IMAP server is PMDF V6.2 running on VMS > > > SqirrelMail runs like a c

[SM-USERS] Performance tuning, large mailboxes and PMDF

2005-05-03 Thread sabino
My configuration: SM v 1.4.4 XAMPP 1.4.13 Apache 2.0.53 PHP 4.3.11 MySQL 4.1.11 eAccelerator 0.9.2a running on Fedora Core 3 hp proliant DL360 2GB RAM intel xeon 3.6GHz CPU Our IMAP server is PMDF V6.2 running on VMS SqirrelMail runs like a charm on smaller mailboxes but is v-e-r-y slow