[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Sergey Poznyakoff
Subject: Re: imap4d PERMANENTFLAGS
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 18:08:48 +0300

> For a store format like mbox(which is a flat file) it is probably
> better to update "en masse", then doing it individually for each message
> But for others, like MH or MAILDIR, a file per message, there is no gain,
> so how about this:

Agreed. The idea is fine. I suppose mailbox_close() should call
mailbox_update_attribute_all() before closing the mailbox. (btw, I'd
suggest to name it mailbox_update_attributes). Some operations
may call message_update_attribute() upon an individual message, for
example imap4d_store0 after doing STORE +FLAGS.
Now, each particular mailbox type may support only one of these
functions, leaving the other one a no-op.

For Unix maildrops message_update_attribute() can simply raise some
flag in the mailbox structure. Then, upon close, mailbox_update_attributes()
checks this flag and if it is set, it will do the actual work,
otherwise it will just return.

What do you think?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]