At some point hitherto, Ricardo SIGNES hath spake thusly: > It's dependent on a lot of things: hard drive speed, processor speed, > and memory. IE: all those hardware issues.
Much more drive speed and memory than cpu though, most likely in that order unless your mailboxes are HUGE and the amount of available RAM is TINY. > I'd suggest using Maildir instead of mbox -- my experience has been that > Maildir is faster. That's really funny since we just had a very large thread here where it was discussed rather at length that mailder is considerably slower when opening mail folders than mbox. Like on the order of 1000% slower or more... Many cases of anecdotal evidence were provided in support of that, and zero cases were provided that support maildir being faster for opening mailboxes than mbox. > There's much less to worry about in parsing a Maildir entry -- every > file is one message and starts with headers. That's precisely what makes maildir slower... there's substantially more overhead in opening many small files than one large one. It performs better on fast hardware with particular filesystems, but in all cases discussed (that I can recall, anyway) maildir was slower. I suggest you read the archives and look at the thread entitled "maildir over mbox?" for the details. -- 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
msg23865/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
