No, you're right. However all these values can be tweaked (in the code) The problem is with the mbox format itself. When I need to delete a message I do the following: 1) Open the mbox file and a work file 2) Copy the mbox file into the work file until I reach the message to delete 3) Skip the copying until I've found the next message header 4) Continue copying the mbox file into the work file 5) Delete the old mbox file and rename the work file to be the mbox file
This sounds OK until you think that for each message of a 2000 message mbox the file will have to be copied 2000 times. This is NOT nice on the I/O front. So, yes your point is valid. If someone can come up with a better idea then I will happily code it. I'm sure it would be easier using java.nio ;) -- Jason On Fri, 2003-08-15 at 18:00, Kenny Smith wrote: > > If the mbox is very large (>50 messages) then I've found that the remove > > I know this doesn't _sound_ friendly, but it should be read as being > friendly. I'm really just sharing my opinion.. :) > > Just as a side note, I don't consider 50 messages to be "very large." I > consider probably 1000 messages to be very large. I would assume 50 to > be either small or average. > > Kenny Smith > JournalScape.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jason Webb --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
