On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 01:16 +0530, Chenthill wrote:
> One advantage which I see with #1 is that its a standard way.

        One thing about both approaches, is that they will consume more space;
eg. on my 'Sent' folder with 21k messages - on average (on ext3) we will
chew ~2k of space for each of these; which is ~40Mb - around 2%.

        For my cvs commits mail archive, perhaps the worst case, of 350Mb,
(22334 mails) - this would also be around 43Mb - at ~12%.

        That's not as bad as I was worried about; though of course there is
some overhead in terms of inodes and directory entries to worry about
that will crank up the overall size - but it doesn't seem horrible even
on ext3.

        Of course - ext4 / btrfs will do a much better job here too; so - less
to worry about in future.



 michael.me...@novell.com  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot

Evolution-hackers mailing list

Reply via email to