Re: [Evolution] Message Filter vs. Search Folders - Open Discussion

[Patrick O'Callaghan <poc usb ve>]

On 11/3/10 2:24 PM, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 14:12 -0400, Philippe LeCavalier wrote:
> >
> <snipped>
> I omitted the previous discussion because of this...
> In the spirit of self-help I decided to play with Search Folders and I 
> certainly answered my own question as to whther or not they're faster 
> than mail filters - they are *allot* faster. Evo displayed ~2600 msg 
> just about instantly. So my question now is, how do you handle the 
> mail when using search folders?

I'm not sure what you're comparing here. You mean downloading 2600 
messages using filters is slower than visiting a search folder that 
already has the messages in it?
> It's been stated that one can have to much mail in a single folder. 
> That said, it appears I still need msg filters to move mail into 
> folders and then use search folders to drill down further. Thus, not 
> achieving my goal of abandoning msg filters. Aren't msg filters a 
> kind-of retro thing now anyway? What are all you guys doing?

We old fogies are still using lots of filters (besides Junk, which is 
always a filter of course). Of course I use some search folders as well, 
but IMHO they would be more useful if one could rearrange the folder 
list to locate them where one wants, not just at the end. I'd also love 
to be able to quickly set up a search folder for mail to and from a 
given correspondent, in order to keep track of conversations (sets of 
threads involving the same people).

As to efficiency, I can't off-hand think of an obvious reason why search 
folders should be faster than filters unless the criteria are just 
simpler. In fact I suspect it's more a matter of perception than 
reality, given that filters act just once and search folders need to do 
some processing every time you visit them. And of course you need to 
compare like with like in terms of matching criteria.

As to keeping folders below a certain size, Evo 2.32 now uses 64-bit 
indices, so that limitation is gone. Of course smaller might still be 
faster. Maybe someone should actually measure these things and tell us ...

poc