On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 09:54:28PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> After I fetched the whole label I realized that offlineimap does also
> take a long long time, and is synchronizing all the flags. It's
> slightly faster than mbsync at doing so, but that's not an issue.
Is this for the first time that you try to access a folder, or
afterwards? I keep a folder that has about 1GB worth of e-mails, with
about 40,000 mail messages. Using mbsync hasn't really been a problem
once the folder has been initially downloaded, since we do a good job
caching the header information. There is the initial overhead of
downloading the set of e-mail messages which are still on the mail
server when we first start up the mbsync connection, but that's a
straightforward download of the information, and it's not done in a
lock-step fashion.
- Ted
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October Webinars: Code for Performance
Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance.
Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from
the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register >
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
isync-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/isync-devel
