Hans Kristian Rosbach wrote:
I too am not familiar with the 2.0 schema yet.. And I do think that
some of the stuff that has changed since 1.0 were totally useless.
I'm going to get digging to see wether this is true or not.
I might also propose a whole new schema, but I do not expect it to
be used by others than me.
Ok, I've looked it over again..
I see no use for the dbmail_physmessage table. It can as far as I can
see be merged into dbmail_messages with only very minor fixes.
Which was the situation pre-2.0
The physmessage table was added to the 2.0 setup for good reasons. IIRC, the
main one was making imap copy and move commands *much* cheaper. But I'm sure
Ilja can explain the reasoning a bit better.
In fact, I dug up Roel's original design considerations:
http://mailman.fastxs.net/pipermail/dbmail-dev/2003-July/002528.html
--
________________________________________________________________
Paul Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NET FACILITIES GROUP GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31
The Netherlands_______________________________________www.nfg.nl
