On Fri, March 24, 2006 09:51, eCet wrote:
> Jonathan Angliss wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Not entirely possible. At least not with accurate results. Plus I
>> think the hold up is in the processing of the THREAD results, and not
>> the fetching of the message headers. The problem you're going to have
>> is
Tomas Kuliavas wrote:
I think yes. So we know the whole number of messages. It is 20.000.
SM don't says SORT (ARRIVAL) ISO-8859-2 ALL, rather It says SORT
(ARRIVAL) ISO-8859-2 2,1,19998,19997..., ...,15000
Nobody cares about the 13422th message. If user wants to access it, ok,
then say to
> Jonathan Angliss wrote:
>
>>
>> Not entirely possible. At least not with accurate results. Plus I
>> think
>> the hold up is in the processing of the THREAD results, and not the
>> fetching of the message headers. The problem you're going to have is
>> you're going to have to fetch the whole t
Jonathan Angliss wrote:
Not entirely possible. At least not with accurate results. Plus I think
the hold up is in the processing of the THREAD results, and not the
fetching of the message headers. The problem you're going to have is
you're going to have to fetch the whole thread response to
