[Dovecot] v1.1 plans

[Justin McAleer]

Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 15:41 -0400, Justin McAleer wrote:
>   
>> In my testing of using sql dictionary for quota, it appears pretty 
>> buggy. Are you aware of such problems? Either way, would you consider 
>> reliable dictionary quota support a target for 1.1? 
>>     
>
> Actually I think I did it today. The biggest problem with v1.0
> implementation was that expunges could be counted multiple times if
> multiple processes were running.
>
> I ran imaptest for a while with 10 connections and in 3 different tests
> the dict quota always contained correct values, so I thought it was
> probably working.
>
>   

I was having problems with it seemingly not making updates at all. It 
would do the initial usage calculation when I logged in, but never 
updated when I sent a message or expunged anything. In the past (months 
ago) I also saw problems when sending a message to multiple 
recipients... I believe it would only update the first recipient or 
something like that. I was quite astounded by that, since deliver is run 
once per user, of course. So I was figuring there may be a problem in 
the dictionary proxy. But, let me double-check all of my configs. If 1.0 
should be reliable except for the expunge problem, I'll spend some time 
today giving it a more thorough examination.

While I'm talking about dictionary quota, do you think it could be 
configurable how to identify the users? I'd like to use uid rather than 
username/email address, as our users can change their userids. It's not 
a huge deal, I can make deleting/updating the quota table row part of 
the rename process, but it would be nice and maybe others would benefit  
from being able to tweak it.

>> I did find that it 
>> seemed to blow maildir++ away in terms of performance. We have a few 
>> really large maildirs that basically choke when quota is enabled
>> using 
>> maildir++ (200,000+ messages). 
>>     
>
> Even if filenames had the ,S=size? Another problem is that the quota is
> read, and possibly recalculated, much more often than is really
> necessary.. I haven't fixed that yet in v1.1.
>
>   

Yes, even then. Perhaps I made it sound a little worse than it was, but 
expunging a single message made the imap process hang for a while. I'm 
not sure how long, but definitely long enough that users would 
(rightfully) complain. I was expecting just an incremental update to be 
made to maildirsize, but it did the same after every single expunge. 
I'll do an strace on the process to get a better idea of what exactly is 
taking so long, but it's fine with quota set to 0, bad when set to 
anything else (enabled).