Matthias Schmidt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] said on Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:32:59 +0900
>No I didn't miss that one, but we could do that before. Ah, but I wasn't replying to you :). >What they added is just a "Macro" for doing so automatically. Yes, I agree, like I said "It's not idea", but it does make the process somewhat easier. >>Instead of multiplying risks with bigger and bigger databases, PowerMail >>works around the 2GB database limit by enabling the archiving and >>splitting into several smaller indexable message corpuses. > >I don't see the point. Where is the risk? I supposed the see risk in that a bigger file is more complex and therefore more easily corrupted. >Any bigger SQL database is handling gigabytes of data since years. Agreed. > >There is a problem, but no risk. >The problem is called time machine. Yep, I'd prefer a more elegant solution. Best. -- Derry Thompson g l o d e r w o r k s | Design - Hosting - Programming <http://www.gloderworks.com> + 44 (0) 1562 631430 t + 44 (0) 7976 802487 m
