From: | Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: running Apple Mail on Postgres? |
Date: | 2007-12-17 20:25:44 |
Message-ID: | 1574517B-29A6-4098-A39E-E0E362E6C6A0@blighty.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Dec 17, 2007, at 12:10 PM, Matthew Hixson wrote:
> This may be a tad off topic, but thought a PG enthusiast might have
> some insight on this. Apple Mail sits on top of Sqlite. I was
> wondering if it would be possible to substitute Postgres as the
> underlying database. I do know how to vacuum Sqlite to speed up
> Mail, but with the massive amount of email I have I was wondering if
> Postgres could more easily handle the workload.
> Thanks,
sqlite is (usually) an embedded database. That means a couple of
things - one is that it's not something that you can simply swap out
easily, it's linked into the Mail.app binary. The other is that, for
this particular application (single reader/writer, simple workload)
it's probably quite a lot faster than postgresql would be in theory,
and both would be dominated by disk i/o in practice.
(And if you haven't upgraded to Leopard yet, you should. Mail.app
sucks less on large IMAP boxes than with previous versions.)
If you want to do complex data-mining on email, there are several ways
to pull email into a postgresql database, and then make it available
via IMAP to a standard client. dbmail.org is one that springs to mind,
archiveopteryx another.
Cheers,
Steve
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | hjenkins | 2007-12-17 21:10:46 | spreadsheet interface |
Previous Message | Ted Byers | 2007-12-17 20:17:43 | Re: Efficiency vs. code bloat for SELECT wrappers |