Re: [Evolution] Evo memory use



On Tue, 2003-02-18 at 16:42, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 00:33, Not Zed wrote:
On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 08:20, David Woodhouse wrote:
Agreed. If we can do sorting server-side, we _really_ ought to make use
of that. 

I dont see it as much use.

Bear in mind that I'm speaking of an ideal implementation here -- not
necessarily something we should try to achieve in Evolution 1.4. 

If the server can sort the mail for you (or thread -- that's just a
special case of sorting), then it means you don't have to have headers
of all the mail in the folder before you can display anything. You can
dramatically reduce network load, and improve responsiveness, _even_
with a relatively local IMAP server. When dealing with IMAP folders with
lots of as-yet uncached messages over a slow link, you're eliminating
tens of minutes of waiting before a folder index gets displayed.

That seems very useful to me.

Server-side _search_ even more so, of course.

Imagine 10000 imap (evolution) clients of a single server.

I very much do not want all of them sorting on the server.  It makes
much more sense to distribute that load across the clients.

This also frees clients to upgrade their own hardware if its too slow,
giving users more control - it can sometimes take an act of a minor
deity to get a server upgraded.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]