26 lines
1.1 KiB
Plaintext
26 lines
1.1 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From tss at iki.fi Fri Jun 11 05:44:43 2010
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:43 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] IMAP MOVE extension
|
|
In-Reply-To: <201006111437.03613.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
References: <201006110854.37969.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
<201006111115.19660.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
<20131949-0279-4455-8FB9-99E4030A6904@iki.fi>
|
|
<201006111437.03613.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
Message-ID: <D159C4D6-24D9-4BF8-98EF-E5E1EC26028C@iki.fi>
|
|
|
|
On 11.6.2010, at 13.37, Witold Kr?cicki wrote:
|
|
|
|
>> I once thought about implementing MOVE operation to Dovecot to improve
|
|
>> speed. But then I realized that if client sends STORE \Deleted and EXPUNGE
|
|
>> in same IP packet, I can just optimize away the rename()s caused by STORE.
|
|
>> The remaining link()+unlink() should then be about as fast as rename().
|
|
>> The only exception is OSX with HFS filesystem, where hard links are really
|
|
>> inefficient.
|
|
> And how hard it would be to really implement it in Dovecot?
|
|
|
|
Much more difficult than I originally thought.
|
|
|
|
|