On Fri, 8 May 2020, a...@globalchangemusic.org wrote:
It depends on what you consider reasonable.
The processing time of file operation that iterates through a mailbox
will generally go up proportinately with size. If you do a text search
without some indexing system like Solr, it will take a very long time.
If the mailbox is just some archive that you pile up and forget about it
except for once in a blue moon retrieval, then it might be reasonable.
If it's an active mailbox, it will be a pain to navigate, in the same
way a single folder with 100K files or a file cabinet with huge stacks
of envelopes.
I would guess some partioning of the large mailboxes into smaller
mailboxes would help with active mailboxes. Most people spend most of
their time on new/recent messages, so making time or size or subject
based volmes wouldn't be a bad idea.
If the bulk of the size are redundant copies of attachments, then Dovecot's
*dbox support de-duping which would aso help.
So, generally speaking, you don't want to have inboxes that just sync all day
long, due to massive amounts of small files in the inbox. This may be OK in
the case of a rarely accessed archive folder, but not good for regularly
accessed inboxes, etc.?
Joseph Tam <jtam.h...@gmail.com>
