[imp] IMAP recommendations anyone?

Chris H. fbsd at 1command.com
Thu Apr 27 10:10:48 PDT 2006

Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:

> Quoting "Chris H." <fbsd at 1command.com>:
>> Quoting Eric Jon Rostetter <eric.rostetter at physics.utexas.edu>:
>>> Quoting "Chris H." <fbsd at 1command.com>:
>>>> Anyway, now that everything is working, it is about 5-7 times slower than
>>>> the 3.09 install was.
>>> Could be for a variety of reasons...
>> Not in my case. In fact very few. I am working with few variables in this
>> case. Very little has been permitted to change. For me, it's a must. As
>> I administer 30 servers, 42 domains and some 15,000 hosts. Everything is
>> as close to a rubber stamp as I can make it. This move was somewhat "out
>> of the box". But as this is a new server for launching a new service. It
>> allowed me to deviate slightly, so as to test some new applications.
>> However, I have carefully examined all the variables and I am down to two:
>> 1) UW-IMAP has always been on the low-performance side of things. It has
>> made no claims to be anything but compatible and regression tested.
>> 2) Horde/Imp have gone a somewhat different direction in the handling
>> of the IMAP namespace, and *this* is most surely where the "shoe pinches".
> Then tell UW-IMAP to stop broadcasting the entire home directory of  
> the user as part of the namespace.  This is what has changed in IMP  
> 4.1 and is clearly described in imp/docs/UPGRADING.  If you are  
> unable/unwilling to fix UW-IMAP, then you should continue using IMP  
> 4.0.x.
> I can verify that a correctly configured IMP 4.1.x installation is  
> *much* faster than a correctly configured IMP 4.0.x installation - in 
>  terms of both PHP execution time and reduced number of calls to the  
> IMAP server.

No, no, no. This is exactly what I am trying to say. I *quite* agree
with you here. I'm simply tired of having to hack UW-IMAP. I have little
doubt that IMP/Horde are doing anything but the *correct* and *propper*
handling of the mail. I've been on the list for some time and have
watched the rebuttle regarding the RFC's. I have actually already
defended Horde and friends in this thread. I just think UW-IMAP, as
dependable as it is and with the tweaks and hacks horde and others have
provided, it's just not efficient to continue using. The research that
I have already done seems to indicate that Dovecot *overall* would be
a more efficient choice. As compared to UW-IMAP.

So, in summary; I believe that Horde 4.1 and friends to be the correct
choice (I'd have left for Squirrelmail a long time ago, if I didn't ;) )
for my continued mail services. I think UW-IMAP is extremely reliable
but a bit too "klunky" to be considered the best choice in the "big
picture". I have heard many reports that Dovecot is alot faster (and
probably more "forward thinking") than UW-IMAP. So I am hoping that I
find that it helps me in my current and; more importantly; and future
dealings in combination with Horde & Co.

--Chris H.
> michael
> ___________________________________
> Michael Slusarz [slusarz at horde.org]
> -- 
> IMP mailing list - Join the hunt: http://horde.org/bounties/#imp
> Frequently Asked Questions: http://horde.org/faq/
> To unsubscribe, mail: imp-unsubscribe at lists.horde.org

Shameless self-promotion follows...
... or does it?

FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p12 (SMP - 900x2) Tue Mar 7 19:37:23 PST 2006

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: PGP Digital Signature
Url : http://lists.horde.org/archives/imp/attachments/20060427/4c4f0ea1/attachment.bin

More information about the imp mailing list