Re: Storing Mail Snippets in TextCache

["Kevin Kubasik" <qub333 gmail com>]

no worries at all (i'm doing AP exams right now, so similar boat) just
reporting that its been working for me. There are issues with mails
that have non-text attachments (such as the infamous winmail.dat) but
I have found that it helps when determining the exact mail in a
thread. (Although, I am fiddling with a way to link messages by thread
using gmail's headers/subject)

I am open to anyone who might want to help with testing of the
compressed textcache stuff.

-Kevin Kubasik

On 5/8/06, Joe Shaw <joeshaw novell com> wrote:
> Hey Kevin,
>
> On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 00:18 -0400, Kevin Kubasik wrote:
> > Just to try and start tackling the issue of snippeting in the
> > Evolution Backend, I set SnippetMode = true in my FilterMail and let
> > my machine go at it. Snippeting actually works fine.. if not splendid.
> > What is our major concern with storing mail snippets in the textcache?
> > (or at least making it an option).
> >
> > If its space on the drive (That textcache can grow ;) ) With my
> > compressed textcache patch (attached, and in the bugzilla [1] ) its
> > about 6.7 megs for the textcache with over 10,000 mails (totaling
> > about 120 megs of space on my imap server) .
>
> Yes, the main reason we haven't been storing them in the textcache is
> because of the size.  Storing all the text (uncompressed) would nearly
> double disk usage for mail.
>
> Also, the way the Evo mail backend is written right now and because of
> the way we have to access Evo's mail stores, there isn't an easy way to
> do a quick lookup of mail.  My hope had been to get Evo fixed so that we
> could quickly jump to the actual mail and extract the snippet, but maybe
> going with a compressed text cache is the way to go.
>
> I haven't gotten to reviewing your compressed textcache patch yet, sorry
> about that.  I've been swamped with Novell stuff lately.
>
> Thanks,
> Joe


--
Cheers,
Kevin Kubasik
http://kubasik.net/blog