Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-04-06 Thread Russell Coker
On Monday 28 February 2005 14:26, sean finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i came up with the number by totalling the mailbox sizes of a 3000 user mail system, and then dividing by the total number of messages in these mailboxes. this generated a number around 13k average message size. i had to

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-28 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-02-27 18:19:45, schrieb sean finney: can't help but chime in here :) On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 09:22:30AM +1100, Brian May wrote: Not every situation warrants using maildir, it uses a large number of inodes, is slow to scan (yes, mbox isn't very good either), Mailbox is MUCH slower

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-02-27 20:42:03, schrieb Ron Johnson: Ah. Maildir distinguishes new and already read by whether an email is in the new/ or cur/ folder. Doing a select all, and mark as read on a multi-GB mbox file sounds painful. This is, why I never will use mailbox Fortunatly I have converted

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-02-28 04:34:41, schrieb Bernd Eckenfels: You mark a message as new by moving it to the new directory, and mark it as seen with the cur directory. Flags are normally added to the file name (by mutt for example). However some MUA-Servers need more info, which is then stored in extra

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-28 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-02-27 20:19:09, schrieb Ron Johnson: Sure, for those *20* GB mbox files. Who has 20 GByte mailboxes ? - It is realy braindamaged... Even on xfs, open a 20 GByte Mailbox will eat up all resources on the System Greetings Michelle -- Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter,

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-28 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 09:25 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote: Am 2005-02-27 20:19:09, schrieb Ron Johnson: Sure, for those *20* GB mbox files. Who has 20 GByte mailboxes ? - It is realy braindamaged... The same person with the 2GB mbox that started this thread, after s/he neglected it for

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-28 Thread Michelle Konzack
Am 2005-02-28 02:43:45, schrieb Ron Johnson: On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 09:25 +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote: Who has 20 GByte mailboxes ? - It is realy braindamaged... The same person with the 2GB mbox that started this thread, after s/he neglected it for a few more months. :-/ Oh yes, the

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: That's for a maildir. It won't help you for mbox folders. Which kind of was the point, as I understand it. Well, the comment that a file is immutable applies to maildir but not mbox (obviously - how would you add new mails?). Thats why I responded, there

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-28 Thread David Schmitt
On Monday 28 February 2005 01:51, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 18:19 -0500, sean finney wrote: [snip] figuring the average email is about 13-15k, i believe an ext2/ext3 That seems awfully huge. In my (Maildir) archive of d-u, the average size is 4,959 bytes. Of course, there

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-28 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 22:55 +0100, David Schmitt wrote: On Monday 28 February 2005 01:51, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 18:19 -0500, sean finney wrote: [snip] figuring the average email is about 13-15k, i believe an ext2/ext3 That seems awfully huge. In my (Maildir) archive

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Brian May
Michelle == Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: inefficient at storing large number of very small files (due to block size limitations of file system), and more complicated to transfer/move/share. Michelle What is complicate ? You need only the right Michelle

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread sean finney
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 09:03:06AM +1100, Brian May wrote: Also, all mailing list software I have seen so far exclusively uses mbox files. Sure, these are implementation issues that could be solved, but currently mbox wins. if the use of your stored mail is append-only and read-only, then

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thats why I responded, there is not really a need to modify maildir files, That depends. I sometimes want to archive the text people wrote to me without wasting disk space (and performance when I search my mail archive) on attachments that I don't

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sure, these are implementation issues that could be solved, but currently mbox wins. Who says you have to use either one or the other for everything? I use maildir for incoming mail but mbox files for most of my old saved mail. Works nice and seamlessly.

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Ron Johnson
On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 09:03 +1100, Brian May wrote: Michelle == Michelle Konzack [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: inefficient at storing large number of very small files (due to block size limitations of file system), and more complicated to transfer/move/share. Michelle

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-28 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 23:46 +, Henning Makholm wrote: Scripsit Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sure, these are implementation issues that could be solved, but currently mbox wins. Who says you have to use either one or the other for everything? I use maildir for incoming mail but mbox

[OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread sean finney
can't help but chime in here :) On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 09:22:30AM +1100, Brian May wrote: Not every situation warrants using maildir, it uses a large number of inodes, is slow to scan (yes, mbox isn't very good either), inefficient at storing large number of very small files (due to block

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread Ron Johnson
On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 18:19 -0500, sean finney wrote: can't help but chime in here :) On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 09:22:30AM +1100, Brian May wrote: [snip] figuring the average email is about 13-15k, i believe an ext2/ext3 That seems awfully huge. In my (Maildir) archive of d-u, the average

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread Paul Hampson
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 06:51:32PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 18:19 -0500, sean finney wrote: recent versions of kernel/ext2/ext3 have built-in dirent hashing, which cuts heavily on the many-files penalty. another benefit of maildir is that when you modify a single

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 11:54 +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 06:51:32PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 18:19 -0500, sean finney wrote: recent versions of kernel/ext2/ext3 have built-in dirent hashing, which cuts heavily on the many-files penalty.

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread Glenn Maynard
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 06:51:32PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: Of course, all of these factors depend on the file system used. I am confident somebody could point out a file-system that eliminates many Reiserfs, of course. You meant XFS, right? (Sorry, couldn't be helped. :) -- Glenn

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread Ron Johnson
On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 20:54 -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote: On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 06:51:32PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: Of course, all of these factors depend on the file system used. I am confident somebody could point out a file-system that eliminates many Reiserfs, of course. You

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-27 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 11:54 +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: I thought it was illegal to modify a message. Status: O? I don't know what that means. It means that the message is not marked 'new'. Many MUA's keep track of message flags by inserting this

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-27 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 02:05 +, Henning Makholm wrote: Scripsit Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 11:54 +1100, Paul Hampson wrote: I thought it was illegal to modify a message. Status: O? I don't know what that means. It means that the message is not marked

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread sean finney
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 06:51:32PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: That seems awfully huge. In my (Maildir) archive of d-u, the average size is 4,959 bytes. Of course, there are no html mails. Though, even in my Evolution list archive, where there are many more html-mails, the average size is

Re: [OT] maildir (was Re: procmail and Large File Support)

2005-02-27 Thread Ron Johnson
On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 22:26 -0500, sean finney wrote: On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 06:51:32PM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote: That seems awfully huge. In my (Maildir) archive of d-u, the average size is 4,959 bytes. Of course, there are no html mails. Though, even in my Evolution list archive, where

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-27 Thread Bernd Eckenfels
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: It means that the message is not marked 'new'. Many MUA's keep track of message flags by inserting this header into the message. You mark a message as new by moving it to the new directory, and mark it as seen with the cur directory. Flags are normally

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-27 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Doing a select all, and mark as read on a multi-GB mbox file sounds painful. Indeed. Or just mark the first (or any) message as read. If one's MUA is the version of mutt shipped with woody one gets twice the pain because it will *first* write the updated

Re: [OT] maildir

2005-02-27 Thread Henning Makholm
Scripsit Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: It means that the message is not marked 'new'. Many MUA's keep track of message flags by inserting this header into the message. You mark a message as new by moving it to the new directory, That's for a