[Kroupware] Re: Questions about Kmail IMAP-client

[Marc Mutz]

--Boundary-02=_pChU+JZKc7NpRlJ
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Description: signed data
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tuesday 18 February 2003 04:42, martin.konold@erfrakon.de wrote:
<snip>
> Technically there is no reason why offline imap should be slower than
> traditional IMAP in any case.

You confuse offline IMAP with disconnected IMAP. The first one is using=20
IMAP as a POP3 replacement (ie. fetch'n'delete), while the latter=20
periodically reconnects to the server to sync local cache and remote=20
server.

> In addition I have the strong impression that the current imap
> implementation does not use pipelining in order to speed things up.

It does, AFAIK. OTOH, pipelining only gives a noticeable speedup if the=20
link to the server has high throughput, but low latency. What you=20
probably mean is combining consecutive stores or fetches. I know that=20
KMail combines deletes, I'm sure it doesn't combine fetches or stores.

Marc

=2D-=20
"You're hackers, aren't you," the barman said, eyeing us. No one said
a thing. The darkness of the Eurotunnel rolled by. Apparently we'd
given ourselves away by talking too enthusiastically about IPv6. He
looked around conspiratorially, lowered his voice. "Can you get me
some credit card numbers?"
      -- James J. King "What's the shortest way to hack a Linux box?"
         Telepolis 2001/08/11 (#9293)

--Boundary-02=_pChU+JZKc7NpRlJ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Description: signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA+UhCp3oWD+L2/6DgRAjetAKCojG94ilfRe9kSgQrSzsLYeKncDACg4/Ai
ZB1vUV1ET8duoLcvcgX5ROA=
=SVFl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Boundary-02=_pChU+JZKc7NpRlJ--