I have set up a schedule that runs a script (twice a day) to copy my most important mail folder to .eml file on the nard drive. Spotlight also searches these 'blazing fast' and the .eml file can be double-clicked in the finder (or in the spotlight results window) to open the email in entourage.
Very handy. :) -- Barry Wainwright Microsoft MVP (see http://mvp.support.microsoft.com for details) Seen the All-New Entourage Help Pages? - Check them out: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/> > From: "Michael J. Kobb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: "Entourage:mac Talk" <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 15:26:22 -0700 > To: "Entourage:mac Talk" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: How I Lost 30 pounds of excess Entourage weight and kept if off! > > Along this topic, I did a little experiment. > > I let Mail import my entire Entourage database. Took it several hours, as > it's quite a large database (~1GB). I did this in another user account, > just so it would be easy to purge, but I can't see any reason why I couldn't > have done it in my regular account. > > Then, I tried using Spotlight to search my database. FANTASTIC. Blazing, > blazing fast. > > I think what I may do at this point is prune my Entourage down to only the > last 6 months or so, and then try to figure out the easiest way to do this > import on a periodic basis. > > By the way, I was expecting the create-a-zillion-files approach of the new > Mail to bloat the size tremendously, but it didn't. The Mail folder is > about 980MB, and contains everything that was in Entourage except for my > deleted items and the calendar and contacts (both of which are pretty minor > compared to my email). > > Of course, this each-message-is-a-file approach for Mail would also hugely > speed up incremental backups if I were using Mail as my main client. If I > do prune my Erage database, that'll at least help. > > I still greatly prefer Entourage over Mail as a client, but the search > feature really, really DESPERATELY needs improvement in performance. > > --Mike > > > > > > >> Hi Sequoia, >> >> Two problems with this: 1) I was wrong about the database size, as Paul >> pointed out, and 2) I made a distinction between removing and deleting >> attachments which may or may not be valid. See below. >> >>> 1. Removing attachments is a good idea, but they won't get removed (make the >>> DB smaller) until DB is compacted. >> >> I'm not sure that the distinction I made between removing and deleting an >> attachment is valid. Could someone speak to this please: >> >> If you Remove an attachment (say, to the desktop), does the space it >> occupied in the database remain "occupied"? IOW, is Removing an attachment >> effectively the same as Deleting it, where the database is concerned? IOW, >> to reclaim the space previously occupied by Removing an attachment, is it >> necessary to do a Compact (just like if you Deleted it)? >> >>> 2. DB has a limit of 4 gigs, or 1 million objects (and objects include many >>> other things besides emails and attachments) >> >> DB has no size limit in terms of gigs; as for number of objects, see Paul's >> explanation. >> >> Sorry for the confusion. >> >> Beth >> > > > -- > 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/> > -- 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/>
