On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:07:25AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> Moving to offlineimap worked right away. It's doing something > different with the IMAP protocol that works with Exchange. Instead of > hanging for a long time until the server seems to disconnect the > connection it downloaded all the messages in very short order. AFAICT, users have opposite experiences. It's hard to tell why mbsync works better for some and offlineimap works better for others while in similar environment. > * cons: Getting mail with offlineimap takes a lot longer, around 2 > minutes to just find out that it needs to do very little. Took around > 10-20 seconds with mbsync, although this was on Cyrus, and I have > around 700K messages in my INBOX. So it may be Exchange that's slower, > I'm not sure. Interesting. It's quite possible we have improvement ways in this area. Frankly, I've downloaded mbsync some time ago. I could not understand how it works during the free time I've had to allocate to this task. If someone has hints or can describe how it works for discovering changes and "trigger" the syncs, please let us know. IMAP is not an easy protocol by design and implementation details in both servers and clients lead to surprising results, sometimes. Thank you much for this constructive feedback. -- Nicolas Sebrecht ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow, J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity planning reports.http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev _______________________________________________ isync-devel mailing list isync-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/isync-devel
