From: Michael L. <ml...@ml...> - 2005-11-29 16:24:45
|
I understand what you are saying. But on the other hand, does it make sense to ask the IMAP server for the status three times for each mailbox, all within milliseconds of each other? Perhaps it would be worthwhile to use the cache, and have the filters plugin modify the cache. The way I implemented it, it is only cached on that execution. So the status should not change within the extremely short amount of time it takes to run the script, unless the squirrelmail code is changing the status (as you indicated with the filters plugin) Marc Groot Koerkamp wrote: > Initially I thought that caching a status respons is a good idea but now i > have my doubts. If you request a status response you want a correct > status. The filter plugin changes the status so if you work with caching > status responses then you need to update the status in the cache as well. > > If you work with a status cache then cache the status into $aMailbox and > not in a separate global array. > > 1.5.1 does caching different then 1.4.x. Probably the plugins newmail and > filters should be adapted in order to take advantage of the changed cache. > > Regards, > > Marc Groot Koerkamp. > > > -- Michael Long Application Development & System Planning Spirit Telecom |