In some email I received from "Jesse Norell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 16 Jun 2003 12:56:49 -0600 (MDT), wrote:
> > Hello, > [...] > > This would break all non-INBOX deliveries. Agree. [...] > This may have implications with shared folders, but those > aren't implimented just yet either, so... Please share:) Somewhere i have a design for shared folders, I needed it fast so I manage to alter WeDBmail to do so, i didnt get any implication with it. (considering that i didnt have to go along the rfc standart, right?) > [...] > I've not looked at Aaron's recent filtering patch, but this > may have reprecussions there - I think at one time there was > a possibility of setting mailbox_idnr to 0 for pre-filtered > messages, and updating later. I understand, but we can still force ID 0 for temporary messages or messages which are being filtered? and we keep consistency with the other objects. I'll look further in the code to see if there are any other implications. > Another note: along with all the foreign keys, which are > a good idea where appropriate/possible, quite a few of the > indexes that have appeared on the list can be dropped. A > primary key already gives you a unique index on the column, > and a foreign key gives you an index (non-unique) as well. Correct. That's sounds like a call from db scheme cleaning ;) cheers
