On Wed, 2003-03-12 at 06:58, Eric A. Hall wrote:
> I'm not trying to start a religious war here, but how much work would it
> really be to have a protocol extension which allowed the client to request
> flags which have changed since <time>. It seems that all of the difficulty
> would be in the implementation (the server data-store), not in the
> protocol, and there would be significant benefits to having this option
> available in the protocol. Faster resynchronization between sessions would
> be very good for all clients, online and offline alike.

I'm going to assume you meant something sane when you said <time>, of
course :) 

The protocol side could be fairly simple -- the idea that Timo Sirainen
offered in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> seems fairly close to
what we'd want. You'd declare that a server supporting FLAGS-VALIDITY
_MUST_ include any messages with changed flags in its response, and
SHOULD make an effort not to include messages _without_ changed flags.

The _implementation_ doesn't have to be that difficult either -- the
common case where no other client has changed flags since the last visit
can happily be dealt with by a trivial change-counter where we tell a
client to redownload _all_ flags if _any_ change has been made.

Of course the protocol should allow allow more complex setups where we
guarantee to give a list with _no_ false positives. 

Some more thought about possible such implementations was given in 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...

On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 17:30, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> - Keep flags-validity value of last flag change for each message. Takes
>   pretty much disk space and may be slow.
> - Keep only the last flags-validity value. That helps only when there hasn't
>   been any flag changes since client last accessed the mailbox
> - Keep low-validity and low-uid. if client request any flags-validity >=
>   low-validity, only return low-uid:* instead of 1:*
> - Keep a log of the last few flags-validities and what messages they changed

Basically, it all looks technically feasible. It's just a case of
whether people will actually want it and start to make use of it.

-- 
dwmw2

Reply via email to