On Monday, 20 November 2006 at 13:04, Kyle Wheeler wrote: > On Monday, November 20 at 09:58 AM, quoth Brendan Cully: > >(also, simple string searches are a huge performance win on IMAP, > >because they get done by the server. But I suppose I should probably > >add that text myself...) > > I was wondering about that, actually. If I search with ~b instead of > =b, will mutt use the local message cache (i.e. would it be a win if I > have all the messages cached)? Might it be useful to have mutt use the > local mcache for those things it does have cached, and the server for > the rest? Yes, ~b will use the local cache, and be reasonably fast if you've got your mailbox precached (it's not a bad way to force mutt to cache your entire mailbox, actually). But in general, there's no particular reason to expect local searches to be faster than server-side searches - they both have to do more or less the same amount of work, and the time needed to communicate the request/response is comparatively tiny. Also, since servers expect to do searches, they often maintain databases to speed them up, which makes them often much _faster_ than local searches. I've definitely found that to be the case doing =b on large Cyrus-served folders.
Attachment:
pgpOSc7HAUFvG.pgp
Description: PGP signature