On 2/22/08, Barry Warsaw wrote: >> Can we at least use a hashed mail directory solution that doesn't >> have massive scalability problems? > > For the digests it probably doesn't matter because they'll never get > that big. I'm still planning on making this change for the queue > directories (though I haven't yet).
I thought we were talking about replacing the 7th edition mbox file format for the raw or the similar mbox-like format for the cooked archives. Using some sort of a hashed directory structure would allow a lot more flexibility in terms of going in and deleting or editing messages in the archive, along with many other benefits it might bring. However, if you imagine python-list with hundreds of thousands of messages in the archive, there's just no way that could possibly scale with Maildir, Maildir+, or any other solution that does not enforce a good hashed directory scheme that is kept invisible to the higher-level applications. -- Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> LinkedIn Profile: <http://tinyurl.com/y8kpxu> ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py?req=show&file=faq01.027.htp
