Re: best mailbox format?
- From: Carlos Morgado <chbm gnome org>
- To: balsa-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: best mailbox format?
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 23:42:12 +0000
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:17:06, Peter Bloomfield wrote:
> See http://www.washington.edu/imap/documentation/formats.txt.html for some
> general discussion of flat-file (e.g. mbox) versus file/message (e.g. mh
> and maildir) formats. File/message is more robust, because there's no
> single huge file to get scrambled, but apparently with real-world file
> systems they're inherently slower.
newer filesystems (xfs, ext3-something, reiserfs-somethingthatactuallyworks)
are supposed to handle walking dirs much better. in fact, mh/maildir on older
stuff like OSF/1(DigitalUnix) or sunos was pretty much insanity has opening a
dir with more than say, 200 entries blew dead bears.
Anyway, I'm imagining on this tests the dcache is geting nicely cleaned while
buffers are staying.
In short, YMMV :)
Carlos Morgado - chbm(a)ma.ssive.net - http://chbm.net/
0x1FC57F0A FP:0A27 35D3 C448 3641 0573 6876 2A37 4BB2 1FC5 7F0A
] [Thread Prev