on 07/03/2004 04:11 PM, Allen Watson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On or near 7/3/04 2:36 PM, Scott Haneda at [EMAIL PROTECTED] observed: > >> I >> sure wish e-Rage could be a little better in search. >> >> With tiger and the new filesystem they are putting in place, you can search >> and find emails by various meta data. I am wondering if this will work with >> E-rage, I suspect not since the emails are in a singe database. Are there >> any plans to make e-rage work with the new search in Tiger? >
> I find that Entourage 2004's searching is much faster than it was in > Entourage X. Would you agree? Yes, fully agree, it is indeed faster, it is still slow by comparison to my minimal tests to a few other email apps that do not use a lump file database. > (Even if you still characterize it as too slow > for you.) Search on certain fields seems almost instant, for me, > particularly on the subject field (simple search with Cmd-F). Searching on > the body of messages is a lot slower. I keep my mail database trim, > currently just 2262 messages, so that speeds searching a lot. I archive > messages I need to keep after 2 weeks in a FileMaker Pro database, and FMP's > search is nearly instant on a database of 41000 messages, even searching > full text and'ed and or'ed with other fields. Much more flexible searching, > too. I think you hit the nail on the head :-) I do a lot of body searches, I can remember (barely) some unique string I mentioned in a email, the subject is something my brain just can not remember :-) So it is a body search I must do. While I am happy there are options to migrate emails to a external source, such as filenamker, I personally am not willing to take that step. To me, it just seems strange, don't get me wrong here, this may sound harsher than what I mean, but I look at it this way: We have data in a database, in this case it is E-rages databases, it does a good job at storing data, but not so good a job at searching that data. As a fix, lets keep a duplicate of the data, one in E-rage and one in some other database. I have never worked on a project myself where when we ran into performance issues we hooked on another data source to fix it, we always find a new data source and *move* to that. I have looked at a lot of email clients, none of which I would use, as the features in E-rage are string enough in every other aspect that I don't care to move. I can say, Eudora, mail.app, and the barebones one all perform search very well, Eudora has regex, which is really nice. All use a index to do this searching. I would not object at all to E-rage having a index, hard drive space is cheap. > Given the way Unicode text is stored in the database, I don't think you will > see major speed bumps in searching. It would require an index to do that, > and that would probably double the size of the already (in the opinion of > many) too-large database. Incidentally...Tiger's Spotlight searching will do > just that; store large indices on your hard drive. Well, store the index separate, I would happily dedicate 2x my DB size to a index. Perhaps as a workaround, a simply drag and drop of the E-rage folder to the hard drive would allow OS X to index it, not sure yet, I guess we will have to wait and see :-) Thanks for your comments. -- ------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Haneda Tel: 415.898.2602 http://www.newgeo.com Fax: 313.557.5052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Novato, CA U.S.A. -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
