very large mailboxes backup, long retention period deleted also

[Andre Felipe Machado]

Hello,
It seems that cyrus over non-linux NFS may have better chance.
But NFS on Linux got some improvements after 2.6.15.
NFSv4 for kernel 3.2 got significant lock improvements as listed below.
So, keeping metadata over local fs, and only metadata partition over NFS may get
better chance of success.
But it is based on assumption that metadata partition needs the file locking
more than data partition.
Is it correct?



Good explanations of NFS file locking problems on Linux .
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/1777/flock2-versus-fcntl2-over-a-nfs
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/locking.html
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/locking2
http://www.samba.org/samba/news/articles/low_point/tale_two_stds_os2.html
syscall stress tester
http://codemonkey.org.uk/projects/trinity/

http://nfs.sourceforge.net/
http://linux-nfs.org
http://wiki.linux-nfs.org/wiki/index.php/CITI_Experience_with_Directory_Delegations
nfsd improvements in linux kernel 3.2
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg24895.html
linux mandatory locking mount option ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_locking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_locking#Problems

old linux kernel locking explanation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=59992
a cyrus over NFS on non linux (OpenIndiana? Solaris? seems to use zones) 
http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/2012-June/036242.html
a cyrus over NFS on linux
https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/2012-March/035951.html


Regards.
Andre Felipe Machado
http://www.techforce.com.br