On Thursday 06 January 2005 18:07, Jens Mayer wrote: > * On Thursday 06 January 2005 06:53, Maarten wrote:
> > So how slow are we talking about ? > > Just unusable. You definitely don't want to work with such a folder. I > don't remember how long exactly it took the clients to sync that > folder, but it must have been something between 5 and 20 minutes, the > first time for KMail, the last one for mutt, thunderbird beeing closer > to KMail thant to mutt. Okay yes, that would be about the same as me. A bit faster I suppose, but then my mailserver isn't too snappy as it A) runs off a VIA C3 733 and B) uses a 2,5" 4200rpm laptop drive for storage. That certainly doesn't help any. ;-) > Hm, maybe that's a point I'm missing. As stated above, I archive my > mails frequently to avoid folders with more than 3k messages. Up to > this size, I can't notice any slow downs that really hurt me (of course > theres a noticeable lag), but usually I just use one client on one box > at the same time. Do you mean by that you read your mail on one single system, or on one system _at_the_time_ ? I try to avoid having two IMAP MUAs open at the same time, it wreaks havoc like newer mails not showing up in the most recent client, and it is the easiest way to trigger the thread-mixup-bug I mentioned earlier. So there's no concurrent use, but the indexing thing happens despite that. > Isn't it impressive how IMAP made life easier? ;-) Well, I see the smiley, but yes it did make my life much easier. Before IMAP, I either had all my mail double, or I didn't have an email handy because I left it on one of my other (work- most of the time) systems. Not that running mutt in screen wouldn't have solved that, but I digress. > At least I found one plugin for coloring different quote levels, which > thunderbird isn't (or wasn't?) able to do. Ah. Good. I'll take at look at it again then. Maarten -- bash-2.05b$ emerge ncy -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
