-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On Wednesday, December 23 at 01:41 PM, quoth Derek Martin: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 10:17:57AM -0600, Kyle Wheeler wrote: >> Now, I'm assuming that you're storing your mbox locally on a standard >> unix filesystem rather than on an NFS-mount or on an MS-DOS partition >> or something similarly weird. > > Does mbox have issues on MS-DOS partitions? I wasn't aware of any > (though you need to be careful about using mixed case). I was aware > that maildir does, because on MS filesystems, you can't use ':' in a > path.
Honestly, I'm not sure. I know that MS-DOS requires explicit sharing, so it's easy for a mail client to prevent delivery of new mail by accident, but that's easy to work around. >> And as long as you avoid those, you can be assured that using mbox >> is *safe*. It's not *efficient* (because everyone who touches the >> mbox must lock the file first), but it is safe. > > I really hate when people say stuff like this. Efficient and fast are two different things. From a parallel perspective, one giant lock (even one giant write lock) is NOT efficient, no matter how you look at it. It may well be *fast* for the common case (especially when the common case is one-writer), but that's a different issue. But if you're here to rehash the "fast" argument, I think we can't get anywhere without pointing to the CourierMTA's webpage of mbox/maildir benchmarks: http://www.courier-mta.org/mbox-vs-maildir/ > Plus, while maildir doesn't need to lock, it does need to open(2) > every individual message, whether you're reading or writing, which > more than makes up for not having to lock in terms of efficiency > lossage. You only need to open(2) every individual message if you're reading the whole thing for the first time. You certainly don't need to do that if you're delivering mail, or deleting mail, or marking a message as read, or what have you. > Both folder formats are efficient at some things, and less efficient > at others. Which one will perorm better for you depends a lot on > your usage patterns and the underlying filesystem. Agreed. > Fans of maildir like to sell it as being inherently better than mbox > in every way, and that's simply false. I use both, about 50% each, > because for my usage patterns, maildir is better about half the > time, and mbox is better the other half. [This is why the fact that > Mutt behaves (or mostly behaved) differently for the two formats has > always been a pet peeve of mine.] Also agreed. That's why I like Dovecot, actually, because I can use mbox for my Archive tree and maildir for everything else and get the exact same semantics. ~Kyle - -- If after I depart this vale you ever remember me and have thought to please my ghost, forgive some sinner, and wink your eye at some homely girl. -- H.L. Mencken's Epitaph -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Thank you for using encryption! iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJLNM78AAoJECuveozR/AWeYZIQAKbACnuGtZCmIxC4IxJSUpfy 1hd+fHLz6xB+wlkX1ET6n+JX/OefRlTa1dOyPhEswLNiOccNyfVBm53LE1awAyXe Ose9yBqDSc/Fw6iC2SFsALqXF9txFYmKBtH1aIfV4XyDPJvw1wqDI76Cm487iVVR ot6udy+AMBuR2er/iYQ44hUCyIt29j4+ghcxg9aSnXSKHzO8J5Xg6UpBQr7jzBT3 yZW8+dTCC1cmATq5Qhp/z314DU3Yu3Fbrh6vQ8QM5Ywj2dSc4aWYxxKysWOF++ET wfa6+LQI+kCr51CGDYSZ38by71j+JU30htNa4Hqb0u6DiYtAlC2ak6YrAgZsObYe 61ZWKSrlSdRy9w/ldyQhbB0ILKxdFhCtQ1V+7BA9gFo+7AiN1GfIc9nLPMgVtIV/ AD505XxS/sPYH0o5l9sl2KF0wlN/cevGVcipzGw33XEVJsFr0qxOgh2NT0mtYEkD NWIrn8J1EzEYKGzYptpD8/u1SSuchIUMPSJqyMS8NyL2sBmNTNjYNCt52c8VIGtB 4em+EkLeH/xOogyP8URg/AAJhyYA9937o+RS87tpLAj80Wp7/bb/JZ6nVfOMdFyn V7rP7T0hayljeKgtvnCVZ/cAVuj5V6H1tRpz6mCSacujWFyklmGfmnoNqtBEDX1e 6zjlrky5dIRtC5NEdum9 =BfJy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
