Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 18:18 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen (Kolab Systems) > wrote: > > The scenario is integration, not extension of Cyrus -which in and of > > itself works > > > > perfecly fine and reliable for us. We're not seeking to improve Cyrus' > > performance with *SQL db backends. > > But, this assumes the data that Cyrus stores in that DB would be useful > outside the context of the Cyrus' processes. I've lightly played with > the idea, and not gone any further - the data available isn't really > very useful. > Well, for one, our ActiveSync implementation wants the following information; - List of (subscribed) IMAP folders, - Annotations, per IMAP folder, - Current status of the contents of such IMAP folder, such as new messages or deleted messages, in comparison to what the client currently holds, - Message contents. While connecting through the IMAP server and have Cyrus hand over the answers, and correlate such information on the side of the 3rd party application is perfectly feasible, I think it may be more efficient to correlate the requested information from a database directly, as opposed to attempting to cache the results handed over by Cyrus by each 3rd party application. > > Imagine the following scenario; a client polls 3rd party application for > > a list of mailboxes and the content's status very regularly -basically > > what it's interested in knowing is whether anything changed. > > Doesn't condstore solve this issue inexpensively? [maybe I > misunderstand condstore]. I thought it was equivalent to WebDAV/CalDAV > ctags (which are mightily nice). > I'm not sure whether the IMAP server's capabilities with regards to modification sequences has anything to do with this thread, but maybe I'm misunderstanding the IMAP CONDSTORE extension. > > Each 3rd party app will seek to cache the > > results somehow, for improved performance interacting with its clients > > and as to not continuously put load on the Cyrus server. > > Which is what WebDAV/CalDAV ctags are for. > The WebDAV/CalDAV scenario doesn't really fly with mailboxes. For one, mailboxes tend to have plenty more folders and plenty more messages. The question is not how the 3rd party app *can* get the needed information, the question is how many 3rd party apps can be integrated *most efficiently* (both in terms of performance/lower overhead, as well as architecture and 3rd party app's design -DYI cache for each 3rd party app?). Kind regards, -- Jeroen van Meeuwen Senior Engineer, Kolab Systems AG e: vanmeeuwen@xxxxxxxxxxxx t: +316 42 801 403 w: http://www.kolabsys.com pgp: 9342 BF08 ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://www.cyrusimap.org/ List Archives/Info: http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/info-cyrus/
