PHWinfo - Afficher un message

06/04/2006, 23h50

sursum.corda@free.fr writes:

> This CGI, the client, will ask "a003 THREAD REFERENCES UTF-8 ALL" each
> time in order to get messages packed as threads.
>>From there, this client is able to pick only the first ten threads for
> example.
>
> But if I have thousands of messages, the IMAP answer can be quite long,
> right?
> That's my main scalability concern.

The only thing you possibly could do is replace ALL with 1:1000, to thread
just the first 1000 messages in the folder; then use 1001:2000 to thread the
next thousand, etc. The only problem with this is that the threads that
span the boundaries will be shown as separate threads.

> Also, I can refine with a date instead of ALL, but then I may have
> incomplete threads, am I right?

If you use message sequence numbers, instead, you will not miss any
messages, but some threads will be pruned into two smaller halfs.

One idea that might be worth thinking about is to do overlapping ranges:
1:1000 first, then 501:1500, and so on. Also, keep in mind that it is
possible -- and it will happen eventually -- that a message with a later
(higher) sequence number will be threaded as a parent of a message with an
earlier (lower) sequence number. This will happen if mailing list messages
arrive out of order, although I don't think that's likely to happen in a
bulleting board environment.

But, yes, THREAD REFERENCES ALL, alone, does not scale.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBENZs9x9p3GYHlUOIRAoNDAJ9O34vSMM6iQ3RCguJf+n +nOygt/ACfc00w
X6NhD4daMFH0dch5auhkNj4=
=P2d9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

06/04/2006, 23h50	#8
Sam Messages: n/a Hébergeur:	Re: bulletin board with imap sursum.corda@free.fr writes: > This CGI, the client, will ask "a003 THREAD REFERENCES UTF-8 ALL" each > time in order to get messages packed as threads. >>From there, this client is able to pick only the first ten threads for > example. > > But if I have thousands of messages, the IMAP answer can be quite long, > right? > That's my main scalability concern. The only thing you possibly could do is replace ALL with 1:1000, to thread just the first 1000 messages in the folder; then use 1001:2000 to thread the next thousand, etc. The only problem with this is that the threads that span the boundaries will be shown as separate threads. > Also, I can refine with a date instead of ALL, but then I may have > incomplete threads, am I right? If you use message sequence numbers, instead, you will not miss any messages, but some threads will be pruned into two smaller halfs. One idea that might be worth thinking about is to do overlapping ranges: 1:1000 first, then 501:1500, and so on. Also, keep in mind that it is possible -- and it will happen eventually -- that a message with a later (higher) sequence number will be threaded as a parent of a message with an earlier (lower) sequence number. This will happen if mailing list messages arrive out of order, although I don't think that's likely to happen in a bulleting board environment. But, yes, THREAD REFERENCES ALL, alone, does not scale. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBENZs9x9p3GYHlUOIRAoNDAJ9O34vSMM6iQ3RCguJf+n +nOygt/ACfc00w X6NhD4daMFH0dch5auhkNj4= =P2d9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----