Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Dec 1998 11:11:55 -0800 (PST) | From | Jauder Ho <> | Subject | Re: [offtopic] Re: 2.1.131 first impressions |
| |
On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> NFS mail is faster (because of the kernel cacheing) :-)
Doubtful. With the right mailbox format, IMAP is significantly faster for large inboxes and folders. I have users that like keeping several hundred megs in their inboxes. Try reading mail with an NFS based mail. Good luck. =)
> POP & IMAP don't work with all useful mail clients
Unfortunately that is true but hopefully NFS based mail clients will either go away or come to their senses.
> You can use fetchmail, but then you don't have roving access to your spool > (unless your home directory is NFS-mounted)
IMAP leaves everything on the server. That's true roaming for me. I can leave a mail session open at work, go home and open another mail session over a slow connection without any problems. I'm sure you won't want to try to do NFS over a slow connection?
> If your home directory is NFS-mounted (any *many* are), the same > problems as with an NFS mail spool apply. > > So it still has to be fixed.
Note I didn't say it shouldn't be fixed. What I said was using NFS based mailers was braindead. I guess this is now at least quite a bit offtopic. I'm more than happy to continue this in private discussion or on linux-apps (there's one right? I don't remember).
--Jauder
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |