On 2003-04-05  Tzafrir Cohen wrote:

> mbox has two major problems:
> * All the data is in one file (locking problems)
> * there is no index to that file. Thus operations are highly
>   inefficient.

.

> mbx is wu's attempt to create a more efficient mailbox format.
> Although they are now working on an improved one.

I've heard of mbx, but mutt doesn't seem to support it :(. I wonder
why there is no widely suppported *indexed* mailbox format.  Every
time I fire up mutt I have to wait several seconds for some mailboxes
to load. (maybe mutt should at least 'cache' its information, so that
once an mbox file is parsed, it stays parsed in memory)

BTW, I tried maildir but it doesn't help much in this respect. not
really surprising, since it's just a directory. jusl like mbox, it
does not have an index. So I am staying with the simpler mbox.

Another solution/workaround would be to change my mail-reading
habits, and keep my mailboxes small, so that my mailboxes will remain
small.  Right now for example I load the entire linux-il mailbox
containing lots of emails (3 seconds at least), just in order to read
the latest mails..


=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to