<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: Maildir header cache now supports imap, too

On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 03:17:04PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 2004-08-06 22:10:34 +0900, TAKAHASHI Tamotsu wrote:
> 
> > Yeah, we need to lock DB files but we don't need to lock
> > mailboxes.
> 
> That's precisely my point.

Then, please understand the difference between locking "DB files"
and locking "mailboxes."
If a mailbox is locked, the mailbox doesn't receive new mail.
If a DB file is locked, mutt falls back to RO or no-cache mode.
Mailbox-lock is fatal, but DB-lock is not a problem at all.
(This is Thomas(Gl)'s point, if I understand him correctly.)

Even if mutt causes a dead-lock, we can simply delete the DB file
or "set header_cache=anotherfile."


And, DB files should be on local machines not only for the locking
problem, but also for speed matter, which is only one reason we use
header-cache. IMO, header cache files on NFS don't make sense.

-- 
tamo