Hans Kristian Rosbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: >> If we can find another way to comply with the RFC besides automatic >> database sequence numbers, we will definitely go for it. Any ideas, >> however crazy, are welcome... although the really crazy ones will probably >> just be used to help come up with simple straightforward plans ;-) > > Is it such that all messages gets a unique incrementing id system-wide > or account-wide?
I believe it is on a per-mailbox basis. At this point, we all need to dig into the RFC, though. Here it is: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3501.html > Maybe we could make the imap daemon assign ids to all new messages in > the database upon request. The only problem with that would be if there > were two simultanious imap requests to the same account. > > That would let the account get incrementing ids starting from 1 on each > account, not starting on 1 system-wide. > > This is the only feasibly way I can think of. The overhead upon request would be terrible, and we'd still have to figure out a locking mechanism. It would be easier to figure out locking at delivery time. But that means a machine unable to communicate with its peers cannot act as a master. So we'd be up a creek in terms of trying to create a robust delivery system. Aaron --
