IMAP 4.1-BETA to 4.2 performance hit?

IMAP 4.1-BETA to 4.2 performance hit?

Post by R. Scott Baile » Sat, 01 Aug 1998 04:00:00



I have a smallish mail environment consisting of a Linux server running UW's
imapd and sendmail, and Outlook Express/Outlook 98 clients. I recently made
the upgrade from 4.1-BETA to 4.2 for imapd. Following that step, I have
observed roughly an order-of-magnitude increase in elapsed time for common
operations such as deleting messages from my largish (~20MB) Unix-format
message folder and my poor server spends most of that time in a
compute-bound state.

Does anybody have any insight into this problem? I hate to fall back to the
older version, but 4.2 is so slow it's practically unusable. I also haven't
figured out how to convert to mbx-format message files, which I understand
would be faster.

Thanks, in advance,

    Scott Bailey

 
 
 

IMAP 4.1-BETA to 4.2 performance hit?

Post by mmi.. » Thu, 13 Aug 1998 04:00:00






>> I have a smallish mail environment consisting of a Linux server running UW's
>> imapd and sendmail, and Outlook Express/Outlook 98 clients. I recently made
>> the upgrade from 4.1-BETA to 4.2 for imapd. Following that step, I have
>> observed roughly an order-of-magnitude increase in elapsed time for common
>> operations such as deleting messages from my largish (~20MB) Unix-format
>> message folder and my poor server spends most of that time in a
>> compute-bound state.

>> Does anybody have any insight into this problem? I hate to fall back to the
>> older version, but 4.2 is so slow it's practically unusable. I also haven't
>> figured out how to convert to mbx-format message files, which I understand
>> would be faster.

>YES!!!  I'm seeing the same thing!  Thanks goodness someone else is seeing
>this, I thought I was losing my mind.  What have you found out?

I am testing UW-imapd 4.2 with a user with OL, Linux, a
Unix-format message folder of >50MB on a pentium 133 with
IDE disks and 64MB ram and having similar results.  I didn't
realize until just now that an earlier version of the
protocol might perform better.  What I mainly noticed was
that the imapd and some other processes in the run queue
were in the "D" (waiting for device) state (as the 1-minute
load average shot up to over 6), making me think, "maybe we
need a dedicated server with better disks to do this"... I
want to support ~20 (say 2-3 simultaneous) users.

--


 
 
 

IMAP 4.1-BETA to 4.2 performance hit?

Post by Jauder » Thu, 13 Aug 1998 04:00:00


        there was a minor bug in 4.2 use 4.3-beta instead. it works fine.
your config should be more than enough for 20 simultaneous users.

--Jauder


} I am testing UW-imapd 4.2 with a user with OL, Linux, a
} Unix-format message folder of >50MB on a pentium 133 with
} IDE disks and 64MB ram and having similar results.  I didn't
} realize until just now that an earlier version of the
} protocol might perform better.  What I mainly noticed was
} that the imapd and some other processes in the run queue
} were in the "D" (waiting for device) state (as the 1-minute
} load average shot up to over 6), making me think, "maybe we
} need a dedicated server with better disks to do this"... I
} want to support ~20 (say 2-3 simultaneous) users.
}
} --


 
 
 

IMAP 4.1-BETA to 4.2 performance hit?

Post by Alan J. Flavel » Thu, 13 Aug 1998 04:00:00



> to avoid the security bug CERN warned about -
>  http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-98.09.imapd.html

Make that "CERT", not "CERN".

cheers (no.  I don't speak for CERN).

 
 
 

1. IMAP folder subscription in 4.2 beta?

Is it possible to subscribe to IMAP folders in the 4.2 beta,
similar to the functionality of Netscape Messenger?  Rich
Eudora is displaying all the directories in my home dir.,
including my html dir and others...

Thanks, and please cc: email

Eric Rogers

2. Production simulation software request.

3. IMAP and Eudora 4.1 beta

4. Intel Anypoint

5. 4.02 beta vs 4.1 beta

6. Compiling MySQL 4.0.9-gamma under FreeBSD 4.7-Stable with

7. netscape with imap 4.1 beta

8. pine "SMTP Authentication cancelled" with SMTP SSL/TLS and qmail server

9. Imap 4.1 BETA Question

10. Performance Issues /w sendmail 8.11.6 on BSD/OS 4.1

11. Seeking: Eudora 4.2 Beta for Mac

12. Compiling Sendmail 8.11.0 Beta 1 on AIX 4.2.

13. How stable is 4.2 beta .....