At some point hitherto, Thomas Hurst hath spake thusly: > * Derek D. Martin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > At some point hitherto, Will Yardley hath spake thusly: > > > our office mail machine is (unfortunately) linux with ext2, and i > > > can attest to the fact that Maildir is pretty slow on ext2. > > > > And most other filesystems... Try it on FAT. =8^) > > I think the overhead of opening and closing tonnes of small files is > inherintly going to be slower than one big file on reading.
Right... > -% mutt -Re 'push q<enter>' -f test-mbox > 6.80s user 0.75s system 85% cpu 8.810 total > > -% mutt -Re 'push q<enter>' -f test-maildir > 7.39s user 2.38s system 32% cpu 29.882 total Yeah, that's what I mean. And that's with your optimized filesystem and a pretty beefy system. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that maildir doesn't have advantages. It does. For me though, this is a significant enough trade-off to make sticking with mbox worthwhile. I'm impatient! :) -- Derek Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------- I prefer mail encrypted with PGP/GPG! GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu Learn more about it at http://www.gnupg.org
msg23443/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
