On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 01:06:11PM +0000, Tony Finch wrote: > Bron Gondwana <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Not really. Existing servers would be a lot more efficient with a query > > which limited to a single "folder", for sure - because they could optimise > > it. But it's no different than an SQL query across a partitioned table. > > It means your in-memory-state needs to be big enough to accommodate all > > the mailboxes that might be in the regular searches, of course. > > Have you seen UW-IMAP's in-memory state? :-)
Nup - I've seen Cyrus' though. It could be trimmed considerably if we had to... Bron. _______________________________________________ imap5 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5
