powermail-discuss Digest #2732 - Monday, November 12, 2007
Re:Time Machine discussion.
by "Bob Parks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine discussion.
by "Derry Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine discussion.
by "Jim Slauson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine discussion.
by "Richard Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re(2): Time Machine discussion.
by "Paul Collett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine and Powermail
by "PowerMail Engineering" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine and Powermail
by "Rick Lecoat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine discussion.
by "Carl Darby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bug report PM addressbook and apostrophes (copy)
by "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine and Powermail
by "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
mailmaster for powermail-discuss?
by "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine discussion.
by "Jeremy Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine and Powermail
by "Rick Lecoat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Time Machine and Powermail
by "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re:Time Machine discussion.
From: "Bob Parks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:45:06 -0800
On 11/11/07, PowerMail discussions wrote:
>Less than a minute - nice! On my system, the backups complete with the
>Powermail folder include, but then in the System Preferences Time
>Machine pane it just sits on "preparing" for ever.
One bit of information that nobody is mentioning.. how big is the
PowerMail message database?
Mine is a bit over 300 mb. Thats a lot of stuff to back up every
hour! Additionally, what happens to TM if the database is modified
during the time its being copied?
So, for now, I am sticking with a Retrospect backup every night, with PM
shut down.
TM seems much better suited for use with email programs that maintain a
lot of separate files rather than one big database.
Bob
*************************************************************************
Bob Parks [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.kidsource.com
" We call it theory when we know much about something but nothing works,
and practice when everything works but nobody knows why."
- Albert Einstein
*************************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine discussion.
From: "Derry Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:56:04 +0000
Bob Parks at [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:45:06 -0800
>TM seems much better suited for use with email programs that maintain a
>lot of separate files rather than one big database.
I wouldn't bet on that. I'd suspect it's the Message Database index file
that's causing the slow down. That's lots of little files.
--
Derry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine discussion.
From: "Jim Slauson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:01:47 -0600
Can someone please unsubscribe me? I have tried at the website, but
doesn't work.
Thank you.
___
Sent with SnapperMail
www.snappermail.com
...... Original Message .......
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:56:04 +0000 "Derry Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Bob Parks at [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:45:06 -0800
>
>>TM seems much better suited for use with email programs that maintain a
>>lot of separate files rather than one big database.
>
>I wouldn't bet on that. I'd suspect it's the Message Database index file
>that's causing the slow down. That's lots of little files.
>
>
>--
>Derry
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine discussion.
From: "Richard Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:15:03 -0600
>Can someone please unsubscribe me? I have tried at the website, but
>doesn't work.
Read the message header
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re(2): Time Machine discussion.
From: "Paul Collett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:47:12 +0900
After a bit of experimenting with including and excluding various files
from the database backup set, I've got things working. I've left these
files and folders out,
Address Database.old
Custom Dictionary
Custom Sounds
IMAP Cache
Message Database index.old
Message Database Spotlight cache
Message Database.old
Old Format Database
Server-side Database.old
Setup Database.old
and the Temp Incoming/Outgoing folders.
Now it's backing up each hour as advertised, nice and fast. My message
database is currently just under 490 MB.
Which of these items was causing the issue, I have no idea, but the
information might be of use if anyone else has similar problems.
Paul
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:45:06 -0800 Bob Parks wrote:
>On 11/11/07, PowerMail discussions wrote:
>
>>Less than a minute - nice! On my system, the backups complete with the
>>Powermail folder include, but then in the System Preferences Time
>>Machine pane it just sits on "preparing" for ever.
>
>One bit of information that nobody is mentioning.. how big is the
>PowerMail message database?
>
>Mine is a bit over 300 mb. Thats a lot of stuff to back up every
>hour! Additionally, what happens to TM if the database is modified
>during the time its being copied?
>
>So, for now, I am sticking with a Retrospect backup every night, with PM
>shut down.
>
>TM seems much better suited for use with email programs that maintain a
>lot of separate files rather than one big database.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine and Powermail
From: "PowerMail Engineering" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:24:20 +0100
Paul Collett wrote:
>Is anyone using Time Machine with Leopard? How do you find the backups
>work if you have your Powermail folder included?
As with all other backup softwares, making a backup of PowerMail's
database while PowerMail is open (especially with a scheduled
connection) can probably produce a corrupted backup. Additionally, your
entire mail database will be backed up every hour (assuming you have
received at least one message since the previous backup), so if it is
large, it will be slow and use a lot of space on your backup drive, as
Time Machine will keep many versions of the entire database. Also,
PowerMail's own .old backup (done when you compact your database) as
well as the spotlight cache (if spotlight indexing is enabled) are
probably not worth to backup.
Jérôme - CTM Engineering
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Whoa!!! Seriously cool!!!!
Indeed!! FoxTrot takes Spotlight to another level entirely!!"
FoxTrot Personal Search user comment on www.versiontracker.com
Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch
---------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine and Powermail
From: "Rick Lecoat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:51:22 +0000
On 12/11/07 (12:24) PowerMail said:
>As with all other backup softwares, making a backup of PowerMail's
>database while PowerMail is open (especially with a scheduled
>connection) can probably produce a corrupted backup. Additionally, your
>entire mail database will be backed up every hour (assuming you have
>received at least one message since the previous backup), so if it is
>large, it will be slow and use a lot of space on your backup drive, as
>Time Machine will keep many versions of the entire database. Also,
>PowerMail's own .old backup (done when you compact your database) as
>well as the spotlight cache (if spotlight indexing is enabled) are
>probably not worth to backup.
Which rather brings us back, full circle, to the point I made a couple
of weeks ago: that I find an automated and regular backup strategy is
made difficult by Powermail, (and it's insistence upon erasing the
recent mail record if the application is closed down -- for backup
purposes or any other).
--
G5 2GHz x2 :: 2GB RAM :: 10.4.9 :: PM 5.5.2 :: 3 pane mode
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine discussion.
From: "Carl Darby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 07:26:21 +0000
Not knowing much about Leopard, not putting it on until it's working
nicely!!, I have however deleted all files ending in .old many times as
they take up SO much space and only appear after compacting Database
anyway so as long as your main Database is working then there is no need
for such files I would have thought. Same goes goes for cache and temp
folders.
Carl
On Monday, November 12, 2007 Paul Collett wrote:
>After a bit of experimenting with including and excluding various files
>from the database backup set, I've got things working. I've left these
>files and folders out,
>
>Address Database.old
>Custom Dictionary
>Custom Sounds
>IMAP Cache
>Message Database index.old
>Message Database Spotlight cache
>Message Database.old
>Old Format Database
>Server-side Database.old
>Setup Database.old
>
>and the Temp Incoming/Outgoing folders.
>
>Now it's backing up each hour as advertised, nice and fast. My message
>database is currently just under 490 MB.
>
>Which of these items was causing the issue, I have no idea, but the
>information might be of use if anyone else has similar problems.
>
>Paul
>
>On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:45:06 -0800 Bob Parks wrote:
>
>>On 11/11/07, PowerMail discussions wrote:
>>
>>>Less than a minute - nice! On my system, the backups complete with the
>>>Powermail folder include, but then in the System Preferences Time
>>>Machine pane it just sits on "preparing" for ever.
>>
>>One bit of information that nobody is mentioning.. how big is the
>>PowerMail message database?
>>
>>Mine is a bit over 300 mb. Thats a lot of stuff to back up every
>>hour! Additionally, what happens to TM if the database is modified
>>during the time its being copied?
>>
>>So, for now, I am sticking with a Retrospect backup every night, with PM
>>shut down.
>>
>>TM seems much better suited for use with email programs that maintain a
>>lot of separate files rather than one big database.
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Bug report PM addressbook and apostrophes (copy)
From: "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:05:00 +0100
copy of what was sent to PowerMail support:
When using a name containing an apostrophe in the name part ( I have yet
to see such an email address) then the displayed name will be shortened
to the letters prior to the letter with an apostrophe. So "Camilla
Berndzén" will be shortened to "Camilla Berndz" for example.
Worse is that if you type "Berndzén" as in my example with the previous
mentioned data in the PM adressbook, then nothing is found if you get to
the letter with the apostrophe. If you only type "Bernd" you do find the
person. This could easily be overlooked if the user unknowingly types fast.
Further comment for the list:
I have been and continue to be a bit surprised with how badly PowerMail
handles umlauts (å, ä, ö, ü) and apostrophes (á, é, à, è, í, ì and so
on), especially considering CTM is a swiss outfit and several of the
languages spoken in Switzerland do make use of both umlauts or apostrophes.
In the messages themselves there are few problems if any, but in the
headers or in the native addressbook problems crop up. It is certainly
very irritating and something that would only be expected from an
english-only company.
I don't know what the problem is, perhaps there are different text
engines at work.
Mikael
Tech facts:
PM 5.5.3 Swedish/SpamSieve 2.6.4 Swedish | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook
G4/400 Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine and Powermail
From: "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:13:36 +0100
Rick Lecoat said:
>Which rather brings us back, full circle, to the point I made a couple
>of weeks ago: that I find an automated and regular backup strategy is
>made difficult by Powermail, (and it's insistence upon erasing the
>recent mail record if the application is closed down -- for backup
>purposes or any other).
As is further worsened by the lackluster support for scripting the
export dialog. It is possible to make a semi-automatic backup script if
the actual export is done by the user.
If one can make do with manual export it is possibly the best approach
to search and find on after a specific received date and export that in
PowerMail exchange format.
However I do have messages in my DB that was fetched on a future date by
mistake (wrong machine settings) and they end up on every backup unless
I search on both after a date and before the next date.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: mailmaster for powermail-discuss?
From: "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:21:55 +0100
anyone know of a mailmaster address for the list? I'd like to pint out
that some adress possibly "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" needs to be
unsubscribed (see below):
The original message was received at Wed, 7 Nov 2007 08:02:34 +1000 (EST)
from auumvs1fe06.three.com.au [10.176.61.186]
----- The following addresses had permanent delivery errors -----
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Final-Recipient: RFC822; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Action: failed
Status: 4.4.7
Remote-MTA: X-Unix; mirapoint
Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 450 4.2.2 Over quota
Last-Attempt-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:03:07 +1000 (EST)
Mikael
Tech facts:
PM 5.5.3 Swedish/SpamSieve 2.6.4 Swedish | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook
G4/400 Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine discussion.
From: "Jeremy Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:30:54 +0000
Bob Parks (11/11/07, 19:45) said:
>TM seems much better suited for use with email programs that maintain a
>lot of separate files rather than one big database.
I *really* wish PowerMail would follow other email programs in splitting
its database into separate databases for each email folder:
1. This would solve the problem of the 2 GB limit. Currently, I have to
compact my database every two to three weeks. Eventually (perhaps within
the next year) I will have to switch to a different email client.
2. Backing up a single database that is nearly 2 GB in size, whether
it's done hourly with Time Machine or daily with Retrospect (or another
backup program), is wasteful of backup time and resources.
Jeremy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine and Powermail
From: "Rick Lecoat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:32:38 +0000
On 12/11/07 (13:13) MB said:
>If one can make do with manual export it is possibly the best approach
>to search and find on after a specific received date and export that in
>PowerMail exchange format.
>However I do have messages in my DB that was fetched on a future date by
>mistake (wrong machine settings) and they end up on every backup unless
>I search on both after a date and before the next date.
Yes, an export solution may be a workaround.
Of course, the whole point of Time Machine, as I understand it, is that
it frees the user from having to jump through hoops in order to maintain
an up-to-date backup. "Set And Forget".
To my mind, "Forget" does not mean "Remember to close down a database
application on a regular (hourly?) basis or initiate a convoluted
workaround of exports".
As far as I can tell, Powermail is still in direct conflict with
anything resembling an automated backup (at least with regard to my
workflow -- others' mileage may of course vary), simply by dint of the
fact that it needs to be shut down before a backup takes place.
Superduper can run a script prior to backup that could deal with the
shutting down of PM, but it still messes with my Recent Mail-oriented
workflow.
And Time Machine, AFAIK, has no such facility to shut down apps before
activating (I'm still on Tiger so correct me if I'm wrong there).
Rick
--
G5 2GHz x2 :: 2GB RAM :: 10.4.9 :: PM 5.5.2 :: 3 pane mode
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Time Machine and Powermail
From: "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:59:16 +0100
Rick Lecoat said:
>As far as I can tell, Powermail is still in direct conflict with
>anything resembling an automated backup (at least with regard to my
>workflow -- others' mileage may of course vary), simply by dint of the
>fact that it needs to be shut down before a backup takes place.
In all fairness, I belive this is because how Mac OS X handles open
files more than anything else. Not 100% sure though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of powermail-discuss Digest
