78 lines
3.2 KiB
Plaintext
78 lines
3.2 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From blong at google.com Wed Jul 30 00:46:46 2014
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Brandon Long <blong@google.com>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:53 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Gmail search on Subject
|
|
In-Reply-To: <CABa8R6s9ozqSa1d9RGGhQMCEty=voWiFhtci1mukpP3n8atSsg@mail.gmail.com>
|
|
References: <alpine.LSU.2.19.9999.1407292017370.5611@localhost.localdomain>
|
|
<CABa8R6s9ozqSa1d9RGGhQMCEty=voWiFhtci1mukpP3n8atSsg@mail.gmail.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <CABa8R6urYaKkB+7xcja6mO=iofx-hriYzsu-kgZi-DnBcTo3xg@mail.gmail.com>
|
|
|
|
Note that this is documented here:
|
|
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/78761?hl=en&ref_topic=3397501
|
|
Though, admittedly, "Substring search. All searches are assumed to be
|
|
words" isn't enough to make this behavior obvious.
|
|
|
|
Brandon
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Brandon Long <blong@google.com> wrote:
|
|
|
|
> In violation of the IMAP spec, Gmail's IMAP search is implemented on top
|
|
> of our search index, and is not sub-string search. Well, that's not
|
|
> entirely true, we do implement sub-string search for "non indexed" headers,
|
|
> which admittedly is more complicated for developers to understand... but
|
|
> the performance benefit is considered to be worth it.
|
|
>
|
|
> If you search for '%' in the Gmail web interface, you'll see that it
|
|
> matches every message there as well. That's probably unintended behavior.
|
|
> I haven't checked recently, but last I knew, our search index didn't
|
|
> include symbols, though its possible it does special case some symbols for
|
|
> things like 'c++'. In any case, what you're most likely seeing is that
|
|
> terms are added to the search, the '%' is parsed into nothing, so what
|
|
> remains is just the added terms (ie, in:foldername).
|
|
>
|
|
> We've debated before what the "proper" response is in this context,
|
|
> whether to have no/all results, or whether to have an error response like
|
|
> <ag> NO [SERVERBUG] when we're given a query which makes no sense to our
|
|
> implementation. Currently, we tend to respond with "all in folder" as more
|
|
> of an accident of implementation than purpose. In general, clients seem
|
|
> ill prepared for NO responses... or even to an OK response without an
|
|
> untagged response.
|
|
>
|
|
> Brandon
|
|
>
|
|
>
|
|
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Eduardo Chappa <echappa@gmx.com> wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
>> Dear all,
|
|
>>
|
|
>> Apologies if this is not the right forum to post this, but it seems
|
|
>> that it is the de facto place to report bugs on Gmail. I did send this
|
|
>> privately a few weeks ago, but received not acknowledgement, so I hope this
|
|
>> time it will be considered.
|
|
>>
|
|
>> A search using the string "%" matches all messages. For example, the
|
|
>> command
|
|
>>
|
|
>> 0000000a SEARCH SUBJECT "%"
|
|
>>
|
|
>> matches all messages in my inbox, not only those that contain the string
|
|
>> "50%", but also those that do not contain it, such as this one.
|
|
>>
|
|
>> Thank you.
|
|
>>
|
|
>> --
|
|
>> Eduardo
|
|
>> http://patches.freeiz.com/alpine/
|
|
>> _______________________________________________
|
|
>> Imap-protocol mailing list
|
|
>> Imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
>> http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol
|
|
>>
|
|
>
|
|
>
|
|
-------------- next part --------------
|
|
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
|
|
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20140730/22a64302/attachment.html>
|