Re: [Evolution] IMAP speed

[Jeffrey Stedfast <fejj ximian com>]

On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 11:08, Ettore Perazzoli wrote:
> > > Yes, IMAP in 1.2 may be considerably faster for Courier IMAPd.
> >
> > it's faster for presumably every server *except* uw.imapd.
>
> Yeah, but still, do we have any idea why uw.imapd would be slower?

uw.imapd re-parses the mbox (it uses mbox as the backend) everytime it
does anything with the folder. That's just plain slow (and inefficient
obviously).

also the uw.imapd mime parser is horrendously inefficient on top of
that... 1 + 1 = 2 ;-)

> Anyways, I'd love to see actual numbers posted.  :-)

so would I.

> If anyone has a chance to run both Evolution 1.0.x and 1.2.0 against the
> same non-Courier IMAP server and the same mailboxes, could s/he please
> do some measurements and post the results here?
>
> While I am not at all convinced that we should dismiss the issue as the
> server's fault, it is a bit frustrating to not have any precise idea of
> which servers are slower with 1.2 and exactly by how much.

it's unlikely we'll be able to keep courier/etc as fast as it is if we
have to make it fast for uw.imapd as well. But maybe I can add an
environment variable that uw.imapd users can set to make it send the
older queries...

> (Yeah, we *could* do the testing ourselves, but we are kinda swamped
> with other issues at the moment, so help would be welcome.)

Jeff

-- 
Jeffrey Stedfast
Evolution Hacker - Ximian, Inc.
fejj ximian com  - www.ximian.com