On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:07 PM, C. Bensend wrote:
>
>> How did you quantify that? Or is it just a random guess based on
>> how responsive the interface *seems* to you?
>
> Sorry, Paul, I don't really have any metrics here... I flipped
> strings.php back and forth between patched and not patched
Paul Lesniewski wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:51 AM, C. Bensend wrote:
>>
>>> The issue is the array_walk() in sq_mb_list_encodings(), which does
>>> not cache its results. The attached patch is still slower than the
>>> pre-1.4.20 code, but it's much closer. Testing and feedback is
>>
On 3/23/2010 9:58 AM, John Gateley wrote:
> Is there a "mobile" mode or plug-in for Squirrelmail that
> would allow access by a Kindle? Kindle's web browsing
> capability is VERY limited.
I'm sure we could come up with something. Send us some Kindles, and
we'll have a go. ;)
Chris
-
> How did you quantify that? Or is it just a random guess based on
> how responsive the interface *seems* to you?
Sorry, Paul, I don't really have any metrics here... I flipped
strings.php back and forth between patched and not patched again,
and did some rough timings...
I'm averaging about 8
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:51 AM, C. Bensend wrote:
>
>> The issue is the array_walk() in sq_mb_list_encodings(), which does
>> not cache its results. The attached patch is still slower than the
>> pre-1.4.20 code, but it's much closer. Testing and feedback is
>> appreciated.
>
> I've applied thi
I will be more than happy to help you!
On Mar 23, 2010, at 3:15 AM, mick crane wrote:
> I do not know if this is relevant.
> the email I sent.
> "ignore previous"
Was this an error message when you got "Ignore Previous" or was it an
option when you had a message open?
> is sat at gmail but
Is there a "mobile" mode or plug-in for Squirrelmail that
would allow access by a Kindle? Kindle's web browsing
capability is VERY limited.
Thanks
j
--
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for
> The issue is the array_walk() in sq_mb_list_encodings(), which does
> not cache its results. The attached patch is still slower than the
> pre-1.4.20 code, but it's much closer. Testing and feedback is
> appreciated.
I've applied this patch, and it seems a little faster... Maybe a
10 to 20%
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Tomas Kuliavas
wrote:
>
>
> C. Bensend wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> After vetting 1.4.20 on a development server, I rolled it out to
>> my colocated server successfully.
>>
>> Since then, the performance in the web interface has taken a
>> pretty bad hit
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:47:16 +0100
Pierre Ossman wrote:
>
> Conclusion:
>
> Based on this, I'm guessing that SM doesn't honour the
> content-transfer-encoding and just feeds the attachment as-is to the
> rfc822 parser.
>
Ok, I'm going to have to back pedal on this. I just found this in
rfc204
I do not know if this is relevant.
the email I sent.
"ignore previous"
is sat at gmail but fetchmail failed to fetch it.
or it was not delivered to my Maildir.
can fetchmail do that ? just skip a mail or is something wonky with the
internal delivery.
How to find out ?
this is just me using a pc as
Disclaimer: This is speculation on my part based on observed
behaviour. I haven't checked the code.
I'm having problems with SM not being able to read some forwarded mail.
I've narrowed it down to it fudging things up whenever the
Content-Transfer-Encoding needs to be respected.
System info:
Squ
12 matches
Mail list logo
