On Sunday, October 31, 2004 at 11:49:01 PM [GMT -0500], Keith Russell wrote:
> I haven't posted for a while because it seemed that no one was having > the long pauses that I was experiencing with IMAP. Someone (Allie, I > think) suggested that they might be due to the large number of > messages I have on the server. This seemed strange to me, since, with > POP3, at least, users tend to rave about The Bat's performance with > large message bases. IMAP is different from POP3. With POP3, you're working with a message base stored locally. With IMAP, your message bases are stored on the server. You keep syncing them with a local cache representation that needs updating to reflect what's currently on the server. Syncing a large message base takes longer than syncing a small message base. > Now, however, I can confirm others' reports of random long pauses when > downloading message bodies. Like Clive, this has always been a problem > for me. As I reported previously, I see similar, but even longer > pauses (sometimes) when moving between folders. (TB! is set to not > synchronize.) OK. > Worse yet, I sometimes click on a message and get the wrong body! I > just displayed five unread messages in a folder. Of the five, I was > only able to read one. The other three all linked to the wrong > message. Now that's really odd. I don't really have an explanation for such behaviour. > These problems are so pervasive that, even though I finally broke down > and paid for the upgrade, I still use The Bat only for testing new > releases. I always end up going back to Thunderbird and Mulberry. I have problems with Mulberry. You're having problems with TB!. IMAP needs good client/server compatibility to work well. You may find that your client of choice depends on how well it works with your IMAP server. MDaemon, my own IMAP server is more TB! than Mulberry friendly. Lucky me. > In addition, earlier today I had something VERY strange happen as I > was reading a thread from one of my Yahoo groups. I was getting "No > message loaded" for quite a few of the messages in the thread. This is > something I've seen quite a bit, but it had always seemed to be random > (and VERY frustrating). Quite often, the 'no message loaded' is associated with TB! being quite busy at working with its queue of tasks. You then have to wait for those tasks to complete. Unlike Mulberry and ThunderBird, TB! works via a single connection to the server. One of TB!'s future development plans is support for multiple connections to the server. > However, I discovered that when I looked at the same thread in > Mulberry and Thunderbird, the problem messages were not listed at all > in the message list. As I looked further, I found that I had two > copies of every message. All were sent on October 19th. However, one > copy of each, according to the "Received" column in TB! and Mulberry, > was received on the 19th and the other was received on the 22nd. In > each case, the copy received on the 19th was a problem message, while > the one received on the 22nd was normal. Did you try deleting your local cache for that folder/mailbox? > As I investigated this problem, I also discovered a couple of > interesting things I hadn't noticed before. First of all, I cannot > find the "Received" date and time (in the "Received" column) anywhere > in the message headers. Can anyone tell me where this information > comes from? Since it's identical in both TB! and Mulberry, it must be > in the message somewhere, but where? The received time in the TB! received column is the time the message was received by TB! and not the server. You'll therefore not see that time in the message header. > I also (as an off-topic comment) noticed that Thunderbird does not > display all the "Received:" headers in the message, but only the first > and last. This strikes me as very strange, because of the importance > of these headers in tracking spam. ThunderBird doesn't do a lot of things that we take for granted with TB!. > I also continue to be frustrated that TB! does not allow threading on > both references and subject. In my thread of six good messages, when I > thread by reference, four thread properly and two do not, because they > don't have reference headers. All six thread properly in both > Thunderbird and Mulberry. Yes. I don't know when TB! will start threading using both subject and references. > Finally, I did something, and I'm not sure what, that caused even this > imperfect threading to break. Now, instead of being broken into two > threads, the twelve messages (good and bad) are now displayed in seven > threads! Anybody know what might have caused this? I pass on that. It's not like the messages changed, so the only explanation would be a change of the sorting. -- -= Allie =- ..... Daddy, what does FORMATTING DRIVE C: mean? __________________________________________________ Using The Bat!™ v3.0.2.2 Rush for IMAP mail IMAP Server: MDaemon Pro | OS: Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 2) ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.0.2.4 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
