On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 16:54 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Patrick Ohly <patrick.o...@gmx.de>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 09:19 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 15:09 -0500, Reid Thompson wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 01:16 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> >> > > * Not able to create subfolders under INBOX -
> >> > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=536240 .
> >> > I hadn't noticed the above, so I guess it's a non-issue for me
> >> >
> >> > What is the second issue?
> >> Sorry missed to mention it here, with maildir we would need to
> rename
> >> files for unread/read flag changes which can be avoided in the
> later
> >> approach.
> >
> > So you expect renaming a file to be slower than rewriting the whole
> file
> > content? Somehow my gut feeling says that it will be the other way
> > around. But I don't have hard data, of course.
> I fell it will be slower compared to the other approach. You dont
> rewrite the file entirely at all in normal usage. May be when you
> expunge folder or export it, the summary data could be updated with
> the mail's mbox. But its debatable at some level, I would say.
I don't think the rename triggers rewrite of a file. It isn a costly
operation. But just wonder why we need to do that at all ? Could it be
costly in distributed environments ? (not sure how significant this case
would be for us)

I also come across another issue, even if we start using maildir format,
we cannot assume that multiple applications would access the data
especially since local folders belong to evolution and would be used
frequently. (see https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=592310 )

> >
> > I definitely won't switch away from maildir as my format of choice
> > because it integrates nicely with offlineimap.
> Sure, I think users should have that freedom. Camel's local folder
> implementation has that built in. This new approach should be the
> default for new users, and as option for users to migrate to it for
> existing users. If users willingly stay with maildir or
> 1mbox-per-folder that should also be there.
Looking at the information gathered, am favoring Approach #2 -
mboxfile-per-mail. I would be starting the work this week if I don't see
any reasons to change the approach. Just want to put in the best
possible solution :)

- Chenthill.
> -Srini

Evolution-hackers mailing list

Reply via email to