From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <43663FC8.9070101@lanl.gov> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 09:01:12 -0700 From: Ronald G Minnich User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Scaleable mail repositories. References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: a32e740e-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Fco. J. Ballesteros wrote: > It's easy to write file servers, but that does not mean that it's the > right way to proceed. IMHO, if you want to see your mail as files, and > you have a file server, it's easier to store the mail in that format. All > the code necessary to handle your storage and index structure becomes > fossil/venti, and all that has to be done is to convert from the mbox format > into your preferred archival format, and to feed upas with input messages > for sending. Isn't this more simple and powerful? Or are you thinking of > something else that is best done using the existing format? just run mh 'scan' on 1000 files and make it as fast as the old 'msg' utility (which I went to from mh) and I'll buy it. MH got so painfully slow for me that I couldn't take it. But, hey, implement it and let's see . no need to argue. ron