Re: Mail Issues (pt 2 )
On Fri, 12 May 2006 11:30:12 -0700
Andrew Sackville-West <andrew@farwestbilliards.com> wrote:
> this is what maildir format is. A maildir is a directory with lots of
> text files in them. each text file is a single email with all its info
> intact.
My setup (for a long time) (optional fetchmail), postfix - spamassasin,
then what gets left in /var/mail gets brought in peroidcally with
Sylpheed.
Most emal sent to me goes right to postfix and then after spamassassin
to either a spam folder or to /var/mail.
Sylpheed keeps alll the messages underneath .Mail, one file per
message, text format.
I used to use KMail, which was originally set to keep all the mails in
one huge file. Not as good, and for instance would never shrink the
file when messages got deleted - the mail folder would just keep
gettting bigger and bigger. My first experiences with trying to coax
Kmail into handlnig messages better (one file per message) didn't prove
very fruitful then, so I switched over to Sylpheed. Currently, I have
over 51K files in there. I've had maybe over 70K at one time but have
managed to delete a bunch :).
On this box Sylpheed can get realy bogged down when loading messages
into a folder that already has this many messages in it. Simply
deleting a message takes a few seconds. It'll get worse as more and
more messages get dumped into that folder. Perhaps, if some database /
index was integrated, this might be a bit more livable.
> many many many many large (really large) mail solutions are handled by
> linux machines. What you are trying to do can surely be done and most
google/gmail and other mail indexing for sure. glimpse and/or swish++
would help things out quite a bit (more notably, I would think, in
"find text in message" situations).
> A
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
David E. Fox Thanks for letting me
dfox@tsoft.com change magnetic patterns
dfox@m206-157.dsl.tsoft.com on your hard disk.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: