Re: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
Hello Mark Wieder, On or about Sunday, March 02, 2003 at 19:51:27GMT -0800 (which was 10:51 PM in the tropics where I live) Mark Wieder posted: MW One caveat that I should point out: if you have an account that is MW keeping attachments inline and you then switch it to storing them MW externally, it only takes effect from that point on. In other MW words, any previously received messages with attachments still MW have them inline. This hasn't caused any problems as far as I can MW tell, but it's annoying not to be able to move the existing ones MW out of the database. All you have to do is RE-Filter the folder with the attachments! I use an 'overflow' temporary folder to hold all the messages in, so that all of them are 'detached' to the separate folder. The original filter has already been modified to reflect the new destination folder. After re-filtering, I then rename the folder back to the original name (a two step process) by deleting the original folder which is now EMPTY, then renaming the temp folder back to the original name. It has worked every time for me. Never lost ONE attachment. -- Warmest tropical wishes, Spike 5 out of 4 people don't understand fractions /\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Against HTML Mail \ / If it aint a webpage it shouldn't be HTML. XSay NO! to bloatmail - ban HTML mail! / \ Ask Spikey, he hates everything (HTML). -- Using TheBat! v1.62i hamstrung by Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1' -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
Hello Doug, On Sat, 1 Mar 2003 18:21:45 -0800 GMT (02/03/03, 09:21 +0700 GMT), Doug Gannon wrote: I guess my real concern was that The Bat might slow down when having to access a large message base. I imagined clicking on a folder on the left of the window only to have to wait for several seconds for The Bat to read the contents in order to display the list of messages on the right. But then, maybe I'm not understanding how things work in The Bat. Do you think that a message base that has gotten large from attachments, etc. would slow down The Bat? I keep attachments in the message base. My biggest folder has a message base that is currently around 59 MB big (is that big?). There is no noticeable slow-down when I open the folder. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. I intend to live forever - so far, so good. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.63 Beta/5 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
Doug- And one more comment, since this hasn't been covered yet: If you store your attachments in a separate folder, as I do, then what gets stored with the message is a pointer to the attachment in the external folder. If you move the message to another account or folder the pointer doesn't change, so there's no problem there. I find that keeping my attachments separate does indeed make things faster, maybe because I'm accessing my email storage over a network rather than on my own machine. It's also better for my peace of mind - I've had a couple of corrupted message databases that I can directly link to embedded binary attachments. -Mark Wieder Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/4 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2 -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
Hello Mark, Thanks for the information about pointers to attachments. That makes sense to me. I'm going to try one account with attachments stored in the message base and another with the same attachments in a separate directory to see if there's a noticeable difference. If you store your attachments in a separate folder, as I do, then what gets stored with the message is a pointer to the attachment in the external folder. If you move the message to another account or folder the pointer doesn't change, so there's no problem there. This did work for me. When I moved a message with an attachment to another account, I could open the attachment even though the file was still located in the original account's directory. However, when I then deleted the message that I had moved, and emptied the trash folder, the attachment did not get deleted from it's original location. And yes, both accounts were set up to remove attachments when the message was deleted. This isn't a big problem or anything, but it looks like I'd probably want to keep messages in their original accounts if I decide to store attachments in a separate directory. I guess I'm just too lazy to want to have to delete attachments manually. grin I find that keeping my attachments separate does indeed make things faster, maybe because I'm accessing my email storage over a network rather than on my own machine. It's also better for my peace of mind - I've had a couple of corrupted message databases that I can directly link to embedded binary attachments. You make an interesting point about corrupted message bases. I wonder how often that happens and how often it can be repaired. I'll just have to try it both ways and see which one feels more comfortable for me. Thanks again for the comments. Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
Doug- Sunday, March 2, 2003, 2:16:40 PM, you wrote: DG file was still located in the original account's directory. However, DG when I then deleted the message that I had moved, and emptied the DG trash folder, the attachment did not get deleted from it's original DG location. And yes, both accounts were set up to remove attachments DG when the message was deleted. I have to admit I haven't checked to see if this has happened to me, but I wouldn't bet against it. TB *should* just be able to use the pointer, so on the surface it doesn't seem to make sense that the attachment wouldn't get deleted, but it should be filed as a bug if you can verify it happening. One caveat that I should point out: if you have an account that is keeping attachments inline and you then switch it to storing them externally, it only takes effect from that point on. In other words, any previously received messages with attachments still have them inline. This hasn't caused any problems as far as I can tell, but it's annoying not to be able to move the existing ones out of the database. DG You make an interesting point about corrupted message bases. I wonder DG how often that happens and how often it can be repaired. I'll just DG have to try it both ways and see which one feels more comfortable for DG me. It's pretty rare, but I had to do some serious surgery to correct it when it happened. I only have one that I haven't been able to repair so far - one message has a bad CRC that stays bad no matter how many times I fix it. I'm still working on that one. It's a minor problem since the rest of that database works fine. -Mark Wieder Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/4 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2 -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
Hello everyone, I'm giving The Bat a try, and so far really like it a lot. There are so many features in this program that I haven't seen in any other e-mail client. I'm having trouble deciding whether to store attachments in a separate directory, or in the message base. I understand that if they are stored in a separate directory, that they will not be moved along with the message if it is ever moved to another account. But at the same time, I was told by a friend that if I get more than a few attachments, that I should definitely have attachments stored in a separate directory. I'd appreciate any comments that anyone might have on this subject. How do you have your accounts set up? Do you store your attachments in the message base or a separate directory? Is there a guideline for knowing when you get too many attachments and should have them stored outside of the message base? Your comments/experiences on this subject would be welcome. Thanks very much. -- Doug Gannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Doug Gannon [DG] wrote:
DG I'm having trouble deciding whether to store attachments in a
DG separate directory, or in the message base. I understand that if
DG they are stored in a separate directory, that they will not be moved
DG along with the message if it is ever moved to another account. But
DG at the same time, I was told by a friend that if I get more than a
DG few attachments, that I should definitely have attachments stored
DG in a separate directory.
I've been storing attachments within message bodies for a long time
and I do get my fair share of attachments though I don't receive
large ones. I've been having no problems whatsoever doing this.
It offers you the advantage of being able to always have messages
associated with their attachments, no matter if you export the
messages, move them to another account etc. Whenever I wish to store
attachments elsewhere, I do so manually.
The only thing you need to be careful about is that if you receive
very large attachments, then your message bases can become very
large and TB! needs a lot of free space in which to manipulate these
message bases especially when compressing/purging them etc., about
twice the message base amount of free space I'm made to understand.
In such a case it may be wise to split the message bases into
archives.
Storing attachments within message bases or in a separate directory
both have their advantages. However, I doubt that safety is one of
them as long as you keep in mind your free space and your message
base size.
- --
-=] allie_M [=- {List Moderator}
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: My Public Keys - http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html
iD8DBQE+YT+/V8nrYCsHF+IRAo47AJ41EyPVlb5lu5Wk9EwZ5QI2hQGgbQCfbhT9
k8roIOPJ21NKvqkfieN4/fQ=
=MsUA
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
Hi Allie, First off, thanks for replying to my message. I've been watching this mailing list for a while, and it looks like one of the friendlier lists out there. The only thing you need to be careful about is that if you receive very large attachments, then your message bases can become very large and TB! needs a lot of free space in which to manipulate these message bases especially when compressing/purging them etc., about twice the message base amount of free space I'm made to understand. Thanks for pointing out to me about the free space needed for compressing, etc. I do receive some larger attachments (100-300k). I have plenty of space on my hard drive so this shouldn't be a problem. I guess my real concern was that The Bat might slow down when having to access a large message base. I imagined clicking on a folder on the left of the window only to have to wait for several seconds for The Bat to read the contents in order to display the list of messages on the right. But then, maybe I'm not understanding how things work in The Bat. Do you think that a message base that has gotten large from attachments, etc. would slow down The Bat? I'd be interested in anyone's thoughts on this. Thanks again Allie for your response. -- Doug Gannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Attachments Separately or in Message Base?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Doug Gannon [DG] wrote:
DG First off, thanks for replying to my message. I've been watching
DG this mailing list for a while, and it looks like one of the
DG friendlier lists out there.
This is nice to read. :)
DG Thanks for pointing out to me about the free space needed for
DG compressing, etc. I do receive some larger attachments (100-300k).
That's not so large. I meant in the order of megabytes. There are
those who pretty regularly receive attachments exceeding 5MB each.
With a lot of those a message base can become staggeringly large
though it contains not that many messages.
DG I have plenty of space on my hard drive so this shouldn't be a
DG problem.
With attachments like those you mentioned, I agree.
DG I guess my real concern was that The Bat might slow down when having
DG to access a large message base.
Not really. It may take a few seconds to initially load a large base
after a TB! startup. After that, it's fast. By large base, I mean a
folder with in excess of 15,000 messages.
DG I imagined clicking on a folder on the left of the window only to
DG have to wait for several seconds for The Bat to read the contents in
DG order to display the list of messages on the right.
This delay will directly depend on your hard disk speed, your
processor speed and RAM. If those are good then you can have large
bases without problems. However, if you're short on power, you may
see significant slowing in loading bases with over 10,000 messages.
I have a folder with 17,000 messages and it took 4 seconds to load.
It's an archived folder anyway. Once loaded, browsing the folder is
nice and fast.
DG Do you think that a message base that has gotten large from
DG attachments, etc. would slow down The Bat? I'd be interested in
DG anyone's thoughts on this.
Not TB! perse. Just the loading of that particular folder, as well
as compressing etc. It also depends on how many of those large
attachments there are and how large the message base is.
I suggest trying it and seeing how your system deals with it.
DG Thanks again Allie for your response.
You're welcome. :)
- --
-=] allie_M [=- {List Moderator}
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: My Public Keys - http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html
iD8DBQE+YXq6V8nrYCsHF+IRAoGBAKC1clkuhoT/ZS0/9SR2iypXk12PkQCgirWR
ptBJUwmxt7VO7ki1yQsG1zI=
=atiS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
