Re: [Evolution] Searching emails?
- From: Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org>
- To: evolution-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [Evolution] Searching emails?
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 06:30:16 -0500
On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 22:23 +0100, Thomas Novin wrote:
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 06:12 +0100, Thomas Mittelstaedt wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 23.02.2011, 15:49 +0100 schrieb Thomas Novin:
I constantly have a need for searching through my emails. For my Gmail
account I usually go to Gmail Webmail which has a very advanced way of
doing this (if you know the search filters) and it's extremely fast.
For my other account which is an IMAP-connection to an Exchange-server I
can only search from within Evolution. Since the search function is
Does Exchange's IMAP support SEARCH? [Honestly, I have no idea]. Cyrus
IMAP supports SEARCH and full-text indexing of mailbox content - so
server side search is *FAST* and efficient. I've seen significant
differences in SEARCH implementations over the years between various
IMAP servers (and versions of IMAP servers, and configurations of IMAP
What do you mean by "limited"?
No so much limited by number of searches you can do, more that I find
that it often doesn't work or is extremely slow. I just now did a body
search for 'distributed' in "Current Accounts". After 5 minutes I shut
down Evolution because I didn't want to wait any longer. No real CPU
usage either so I doubt much was going on.
It would be interesting to see the telemetry on such a request; is
Evolution asking the server to search the mailbox or downloading the
required data of all candidate messages in order to search locally? [if
the later then no wonder it is slow - and your grep-test, while fast,
will be inaccurate].
According to the go-evolution Wiki:
Searching is implemented using a customised
Camel.Search#Camel.FolderSearch object. Since most search operations
work against the Camel.FolderSummary, those are unaltered, but the
(body-contains ...) search is overridden, and sent to the server using
the UID SEARCH command.
Then instead did the search with grep. In < 5 secs it was done with two
But, again, this assumes that the mail is local. A fast, and
incorrect/incomplete, response is worth much.
] [Thread Prev