in reply to (OT) Giving users what they want / My mail administration dilemma

Don't forget that you can have multiple imap folders.

I keep a lot of old emails just in case I need to refer to them later. I use pine, and I've noticed that it gets slower as my inbox gets bigger. It would be unusable if I kept everything in my inbox. To speed things up I create a new imap folder once a month and move my inbox to it, thus cleaning out my inbox.

Maybe you should encourage your users to do something like that. Even if you go to a different imap implementation, having smaller folders might help keep things quick. You could automate the process with scripts that move the folders at scheduled dates, or with scripts that run periodically and warn you about users with exceptionally large folders.

  • Comment on Re: (OT) Giving users what they want / My mail administration dilemma

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: (OT) Giving users what they want / My mail administration dilemma
by submersible_toaster (Chaplain) on Feb 18, 2003 at 04:41 UTC

    We certainly encourage users to organise their mail, most do it in folders by 'project of relevance' but I am sympathetic in many regards... my IMAP folder for squid mailing list is monstrous, sometimes the 'all-in-one-place' method has to be traded for clunky performance. I'm mid way through build-configure dance with dbmail1.0 released in december 2002 and if it does what it says , I will be thrilled... moreover, if their proposed features become reality I might even be able to junk an Exchange Server (oh baby!). I am setting aside some time tomorrow to do some logging on the IMAP server regarding how much CPU time is spent by which users, which should give me a shortlist to 'educate-and-enlighten' :) I like the idea of warning about exceptionally large folders, maybe the mail should go to the offending user.


    I can't believe it's not psellchecked