On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Timo Sirainen <t...@iki.fi> wrote: > On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 16:04 -0800, Mark Moseley wrote: >> > The gotcha is that you have two completely independent quotas with >> > independent usage/limits for the INBOX and Archive namespaces. If that >> > is what you want, it should all be fine. >> >> Nope, that's totally fine. The idea is to put Archive on cheaper >> (slower) storage and then grant more generous quotas there to make it >> worth their while to use, without slowing down their Inbox. Another >> application would be to put their Spam in another namespace (for >> people who choose to have it put in a separate folder) with a lower >> quota, again to offload it onto cheaper storage, since hardly anyone >> actually looks at it. > > Should be fine then. > >> Or is this something that I could be doing more transparently in 2.1 with >> imapc? > > I don't really see how that could help.
Ah, bummer. I thought maybe 2.1 could proxy to a separate folder or namespace (but I've also barely had a chance to look at it), like so certain folders would be grabbed from a proxy. Haven't really thought that through though :)
