On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 21:50 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-03 at 19:10 -0400, Philippe LeCavalier wrote: > > > 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. > > > > All my mail gets filtered when the headers are downloaded and since > > I've chosen to download mail locally the filters take a surprising > > amount of time to complete. > > One question: in your Junk controls are you using "do not mark as Junk > if sender is in my address book", *without* marking "only check my local > address book"? Nope. Most of my spam filtering is server-side. If need be, I will select "mark as junk" from tim eto time but that's it. > If so, Evo is doing an LDAP lookup for every source > address in every message, which can be slow. So this isn't the case for me. > > > In other words, if I loaded all my mail in my Inbox and simply used > > search folders the speed is only limited by the time it would take to > > select the appropriate search folder. > > Meaning the time taken to run the search selection criterion on the > contents of the mailbox. This should be similar to the time taken to run > a filter, unless the implementations are completely different. Must be different. I do see the new mail in my Inbox almost instantly but the time it takes to move them(filter them) into the respected folders is significant when compared to the time taken to perform the search function. > > > However, and this is significant for me, if I do leave all my mail in > > the Inbox when I load my mail in a webclient I'll be wading through > > thousands of emails because those search folders > > won't exist server-side. > > Unless you do at least some server-side filtering, in which case it's > all done before you even look at it. I use Gmail filtering for volume > mail, so messages just appear in the right folders when I access it. > Google has more compute power than my desktop :-) Yes. Well, this suggestion to use IMAPfilter would certain alleviate the pain of having Evo perform that task. Plus, and I love this one, the filtering is independent of the MUA as you mentioned which is *exactly* what I and perhaps many people are looking for. I'm going to try and find the time in between clients to implement IMAPfilter today and see. I am concerned about the potential "race" issue as you mentioned. I'm not seeing any mention of this on the project site. Does any one have any insight? Phil > > poc > > _______________________________________________ > evolution-list mailing list > evolution-list@gnome.org > To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
_______________________________________________ evolution-list mailing list evolution-list@gnome.org To change your list options or unsubscribe, visit ... http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
