Lars Kneschke wrote:
> Paul J Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: 
>> That makes sense. Fetching is still very much sub-optimal in dbmail atm.
>> I've redone sorting which should be very fast, but fetch is still
>> refactored 2.0 style code. It doesn't take advantage of the header
>> caches very much yet, and is not very smart about message ranges.
> 
> Yes, that seems to be main problem. Do you have a time line when you want to
> have a look at this?

Most of the work is done already. But integration into the current
codebase will have to wait until later this year (2.3+)

-- 
  ________________________________________________________________
  Paul Stevens                                      paul at nfg.nl
  NET FACILITIES GROUP                     GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31
  The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl

Reply via email to