MBOX-Line: From lyndon at orthanc.ca  Mon Mar  9 18:55:45 2015
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:54 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] If Crispin were creating IMAP today how would
	it be different?
In-Reply-To: <CAP1qinY-d_fpmfwJ=04GUZhAnkZpPxzwMGfVdn8--4z=tJT5_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <54FAEB94.4070508@lavabitllc.com> <54FBF289.3010202@psaux.com>
	<7164.1425831184@parc.com>
	<1425907661.1215497.237833469.1EDA571D@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<6506.1425915329@parc.com>
	<B03452330F6149E180E449A493F28C2B@gmail.com>
	<CAP1qinZdV1LW6XiWfqfk2A+TC6HsYsAWtT-KSffTNdOFqG_Tjw@mail.gmail.com>
	<7782A916-12BB-488C-BD57-697FDB5D47E2@orthanc.ca>
	<CAP1qinY-d_fpmfwJ=04GUZhAnkZpPxzwMGfVdn8--4z=tJT5_w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0C18524D-28EC-4DF9-A888-678E7DD4E56A@orthanc.ca>


On Mar 9, 2015, at 4:44 PM, Imants Cekusins <imantc@gmail.com> wrote:

> Simply from pragmatic point of view: if these tasks need not to be
> done, server is less busy and can process higher throughput.

The micro-optimization fallacy.

Before you dive in to this too far, spend a bit of time reading the papers Rob Pike and Brian Kernighan have published over the years.

Also, consider the latency of a network connection vs. the speed of the CPUs processing the data travelling to/from them.  Is the CPU you are using to parse your IMAP/SMTP stream so slow that it cannot do a 'c = tolower(getchar())' in real time?  Is it slower than your network link?  Even my ancient pre-Android phone can keep up with that.  Let alone the group of mail servers I run that manage to push through several hundred messages a second.

--lyndon

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 817 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20150309/1e28d2a4/attachment.sig>
