> So, in order to get one message we need to look it up in this order:
> Users->Mailboxes->Physmessages->mailblks
>
> Well, this sucks.. But I guess it's nice for IMAP users. But does
> people actually copy messages that much? I've never done so myself,
> and I don't really see any big use for it. In my openion it is not
> worth it to make everything else slow and complex in order to speed
> up a seldomly used function. The move argument is not true I think,
> couldn't that be just as easily done using a simple update?
Well, I've taken a good look at it again.. And I cannot really see
that this is true..
Physmessages is not a layer between Mailboxes and Mailblks.
Physmessages only contains one id (it's own), and both
Mailboxes and Mailblks point to physmessages using that id.
So I still see no gain from using the Physmessages table.
CREATE SEQUENCE dbmail_physmessage_id_seq;
CREATE TABLE dbmail_physmessage (
id INT8 DEFAULT nextval('dbmail_physmessage_id_seq'),
messagesize INT8 DEFAULT '0' NOT NULL,
rfcsize INT8 DEFAULT '0' NOT NULL,
internal_date TIMESTAMP WITHOUT TIME ZONE,
PRIMARY KEY(id)
);
See, it would need another id in there to be able to point
one mailblks into several mailboxes.
Once again.. Is there any logic behind this in it's current layout?
-=Dead2=-
