Author: Tom Samplonius Date: To: Juha Saarinen CC: Peter Galbavy, Nigel Metheringham, Dave C., Michael J. Tubby B.Sc. G8TIC, exim-users@exim.org Subject: Re: [Exim] Mail storage formats/ POP/IMAP/webmail daemon/etc..
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Juha Saarinen wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Peter Galbavy wrote:
>
>
> > The problem is that the benchmark compares mbox and maildir formats. I
> > suspect that the results would be very different if the default format were
> > mbx.
>
> Not sure what you mean here -- I thought that was the purpose of the
> benchmark? I know Sam's mixed in other metrics as well, to compare UW-IMAP
> with Courier, but still the main idea seems to be a comparison of the two
> storage formats (albeit with different programs).
>
> Courier only supports maildir.
MBX is not the same as mbox.
I think everything agrees that mbox is a bad format. So benchmarks
against mbox always look good, because every other format is better. A
benchmark between maildir and mbx, and maildir and Cyrus would be
considerably more useful.
Beware that Exim uses internal MBX support, rather than the WU library.
This can pose compatibility problems. Marc Crispin (the author) certainly
doesn't recommend anyone do this.
