robert burrell donkin wrote:
one of the tricky points about IMAP is that reasonable performance requires that commands be executed in parallel but there are complex rules that must be applied to the scheduling. to support concurrent access to the same mailbox by multiple clients requires understanding of all commands that all clients wish to scheduled against that mailbox. this suggests to me that the scheduler cannot be associated with a single handler.
This is interesting! Can you provide an example of how concurrency have to be managed? Does it mean we have to take care to correctly coordinate/sort commands for different protocols?
Do you think it is better to manage sorting of commands instead of simply using locks? Aren't locks enough for an IMAP implementation?
(forgive me but I don't have IMAP knowledge)
given that a mailbox may (in james) may support multiple protocols, i cannot see clearly how this could be done without a single multiple protocol schedule per mailbox.
before IMAP we simply had MailRepository and MailRepository manage Locks over Mail objects. MailRepository provide easy services and is synchronized, everyone (pop3/smtp/spoolmanager/remotemanager) currently uses the same repository interface.
Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
