[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: check for new mail ?
From:       Michael =?iso-8859-1?q?H=E4ckel?= <haeckel () kde ! org>
Date:       2002-01-29 7:50:57
[Download RAW message or body]

On Monday 28 January 2002 23:37, Dirk Mueller wrote:
>
> Thats true. but with 2000 mails the difference is not big. actually kmail
> looks worse as it doens't have any progress information during opening the
> folde.r

Well, but my folders currently have up to 80000 mails.

> mutt locks the mbox. If kmail would lock as well there would be no problem
> (also with procmail which can respect the locks as well). Of course there
> is always the NFS problem, but with locking it could work at least a bit
> better than it does now :(

NFS is actually the reason why this was disabled somewhen after KDE 2.0.

Anyway, this is not the main problem here. As soon as the locking is over, we 
still don't want to reparse always the whole 200MB or whatever sized mbox 
file. This is the real problem.

Just a "cat mboxfile > /dev/null" of such a folder takes already 30 seconds 
here, whereas KMail opens it in just 15 seconds including all parsing, 
sorting, threading and displaying. If it's already in the disc cache, then it 
just takes 7 seconds.

A different possibility if you want to keep your setup is setting an IMAP 
server. Then you can access your mail from everywhere even with a GUI client.
If you use UW-IMAP it uses mbox format, works together with procmail, purging 
scripts and mutt, but is also has fairly low performance, when it comes to 
huge folders which you however don't seem to have.

Regards,
Michael Häckel


_______________________________________________
kmail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]