dovecot - Feb 2009 - Postfix LDA vs the Dovecot LDA + other quetions

Guys , 

1. What is the benefit of using Dovecot' LDA as compared to postfix's
LDA? Will there be better performance?

And along the same vein,

2. What is the benefit of using  Dovecot's SASL as compared to Cyrus SASL?
Is there better performance?

3. Quota Management ( Creating, enforcing, notifying ) - is it done thru dovecot
or postfix or are both needed?



Regards,
mgomez

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:58:01PM -0800, Linux Advocate
wrote:
> 
> Guys , 
> 
> 1. What is the benefit of using Dovecot' LDA as compared to
postfix's
> LDA? Will there be better performance?

With Dovecot's LDA, mailbox indexes are updated at mail delivery time
instead of (only) at pop3/imap login time, which should result in faster
logins when you have a lot of new mail.

And Dovecot's LDA has extra functionality, most notably Sieve support.
But if you don't use all that, Postfix' LDA works fine too.


	Geert


-- 
Geert Hendrickx  -=-  ghen at telenet.be  -=-  PGP: 0xC4BB9E9F
This e-mail was composed using 100% recycled spam messages!

On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 23:58 -0800, Linux Advocate wrote:
> 2. What is the benefit of using  Dovecot's SASL as compared to Cyrus
SASL? Is there better performance?
Probably not, but I've always hated configuring Cyrus SASL. It's not as
flexible and the error and debug messages are worse.
> 3. Quota Management ( Creating, enforcing, notifying ) - is it done thru
dovecot or postfix or are both needed?
Depends on if you use Dovecot LDA. If not, then both.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL:
<http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20090223/0bbe02e2/attachment-0002.bin>

On 2/23/2009 9:21 AM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 23:58 -0800, Linux Advocate wrote:
>> 2. What is the benefit of using  Dovecot's SASL as compared to
Cyrus SASL? Is there better performance?
> 
> Probably not, but I've always hated configuring Cyrus SASL. It's
not as
> flexible and the error and debug messages are worse.
I agree... but the one disadvantage to dovecot sasl is it cannot be used
as CLIENT mechanism... is adding this capability by any chance on the radar?

-- 

Best regards,

Charles

> 
> On Sun, 2009-02-22 at 23:58 -0800, Linux Advocate wrote:
> > 2. What is the benefit of using  Dovecot's SASL as compared to
Cyrus SASL? Is
> there better performance?
> 
> Probably not, but I've always hated configuring Cyrus SASL. It's
not as
> flexible and the error and debug messages are worse.
> 
> > 3. Quota Management ( Creating, enforcing, notifying ) - is it done
thru
> dovecot or postfix or are both needed?
> 
> Depends on if you use Dovecot LDA. If not, then both.
Timo, if we use the dovecot LDA, we do need to create a user "vmail" ,
with no login priveleges etc?
my  /home/vmail/ directories are owned by postfix. do i then need to make vmail
a member of the group?

Or will it be easier to make /home/vmail to be owned by user vmail? in this
scenario, we need not worry about postfix access bcos its dovecot's LDA that
is writing and reading from /home/vmail?


regards,
mgomez