so spake Niklas Morberg [2004.07.08 @ 07:04]: > Hi there, > > I'm just getting started using mutt and from the looks of it it seems > like my future MUA. Up until now I have been using Gnus, but I am > getting tired with the slow performance over IMAP. although i love mutt, there are still some circumstances where mutt's imap performance is less than desirable. it is definitely fast and manageable for mailboxes of about a 1000 messages, but much more than that and things can be painfully slow (search the archives for topics about imap header caching...). i'm sure some others on this list can give you an idea of what kind of performance to expect for different size mboxes, types, and connection speeds, however. [OT] incidentally, does anyone know how different mailbox formats like mbox, maildir, etc. effect imap performance? [/OT] -- *------------------------* // ste\/e || 0x44288D05 // *------------------------*
Attachment:
pgpqwwnXQsRqG.pgp
Description: PGP signature