Re: Backup compaction optimization in a block-level replication environment
Deborah Pickett <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.imap.cyrus |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> Food for thought. Maybe instead of having one "%SHARED" backup, having one "%SHARED.foo" backup per top-level shared folder would be a better implementation? I haven't seen shared folders used much in practice, so it's interesting to hear about it. > > Looking at your own data, if you had one "%SHARED.foo" backup per top level shared folder, would they be roughly user-sized pieces, or still too big? If too big, how deep would you need to go down the tree until the worst offenders are a manageable size? (If I make it split shared folders like this, maybe "how-deep-to-split-shared-folders" needs to be a configuration parameter, because I guess it'll vary from installation to installation.) > For my data, %SHARED.foo would be the perfect granularity level. Each foo is a shared email address like "sales" or "accounts" and it gets about as much traffic as a user account does. (Two months ago when we were on Exchange, they _were_ user accounts.) foo also includes "#calendars" and "#addressbooks" on my server so there are weird characters to deal with. -- Deborah Pickett System Administrator Polyfoam Australia Pty Ltd ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://www.cyrusimap.org/ List Archives/Info: http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/ To Unsubscribe: https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/info-cyrus