> But I am still not sure how much the performance gain is by > putting it into separate tables compared to searching on the > message blocks.
Consider a hypothetical user who passes 2-5MB documents back and forth between colleagues all day long, and for whatever reason (he is part of management?) saves a copy of all mail sent and received. (He must be using a native webmail program, it looks like :). If he wants to search for a Subject including "Jan-Promo.doc" in all his messages, there's going to be a huge difference in the two setups. Once again, the biggest benefit of this is for native applications like webmail and the proposed nntp server (and even native nntp clients, should any be written). Ilja thinks imap's important, too. :) If it's written generically, the dbmail-supplied headers to be cached would be be optimized for imap, and eg. weDBmail install doc could tell you how to set it up for weDBmail. I still think it'd be benefitial to have a seperate document or seperate doc section for optimizing for imap-only, pop3-only, or combined use (eg. pop3 users could turn header caching off). -- Jesse Norell [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not my email address; change "administrator" to my first name. --
