On 31.12.2003 11:53 +0000 Richard Bang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The update on the index file to clean up the zero-share-count expunged > message can be deferred until some process gets an exclusive lock on it.
Does this not completely nullify any advantage of using message indexes over UID's.
If I have two processes, one of which has expunged and one of which has not, they will have different indexes for messages above the expunge point.
yes both processes will have a different conception of sequence numbers until such time that they both sync their views.
The restrictions on when a client can see untagged expunges from the server and that new messages always appear at the end are in the protocol exactly for the purpose that this kind of situation can be gracefully handled.
This way imap achieves syncronisation of different concurrent views of a mailbox in a very light weight way.
Other much more complex setups using callbacks to clients over rpc mechnism to syncronously notify them of changes in the mailbox are thinkable but propably far too complex to standardize.
IMHO the imap protocol handles all this in a very elegant although perhaps not immediately obvious way. It took me some time reading the rfcs, the
reference implementations and the mailing list archives to understand what
it's all about.
Greetings Christian
-- Christian Kratzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] CK Software GmbH http://www.cksoft.de/ Phone: +49 7452 889 135 Fax: +49 7452 889 136
