On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 10:45:20AM +0200, Geert Hendrickx wrote: > On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 10:27:32AM +0200, Jost Krieger wrote: ... > > That could lead to slight problems, like hardlinking totally unrelated > > messages, e.g. empty messages. Some Headers like From:, To:, Date:, > > Subject: should probably be identical. > > Message-ID perhaps? :-)
Yep, add that ... > > > For some consistency, just removing *locally* generated trace headers > > before fingerprinting might lead to better results. > > That may still leave identical messages not hard-linked thus wasting space. > Eg. if they come from MTA's that do recipient splitting, or messages that > are routed via different systems. The Received headers will be different > but the body generally identical. True, but these headers are quite important sometimes. > I think a better solution is what was suggested here before, ie. to keep > the (unique) message headers in a Maildir-like format, containing links to > (single-instance stored) message bodies in a a separate location. Probably better, but to make this transparent for the users, it would need quite a bit of work in dovecot. Jost -- | Helft Spam ausrotten! HTML in Mail ist unhöflich. | | Postmaster, JAPH, manchmal Wahrsager am RZ der RUB | | Wahre Worte sind nicht gefällig, gefällige Worte sind nicht wahr.| | Lao Tse, Tao Te King 81 |
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
