Hi,

I having some problem with the handling of new and old mail,
again. Somehow I still couldn't figure it out how to handle
it. I actually thought that that mutt indicates the folders
with new mail with 'N' in the folder browser and the main
menu status bar indicates how many of these folders have new
messages.
My problem is that I mostly see almost all of my folders
even if they don't have any new mail.

E.g. I have 37 Mailboxes and right now, the status bar says
that in 36 of these there are new mail, but I actually just
have new mail in 7 mailboxes. Even if I enter a folder with
indicated new mail and checking the flags, there is no new
mail (especially the different coloring for old and new mail
works fine,strange!?). Afterwards going back to the folder
menu the just visited folder is not indicated with 'N'
anymore, but the indication turns back on after visiting a
different folder.

As you can see, I have some trouble handling the 37
mailboxes. I started to use a patch to see the number of
unread messages, but actually I don't want to use it
anymore. Now, I thought it would be a good way to move all
old mail out of the folder with a folder-hook, but that
would be to much for me.

Could anybody give me a hint!?

Greetings, Fabian

From:	Sven Guckes
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	10 Jan 2005 13:33:23 GMT

* Fabian Braennstroem [2005-01-10]:
> I having some problem with the handling of new and old mail, again.
> Somehow I still couldn't figure it out how to handle it. I actually
> thought that that mutt indicates the folders with new mail
> with 'N' in the folder browser and the main menu status bar
> indicates how many of these folders have new messages.

well - wrong.

> My problem is that I mostly see almost all of
> my folders even if they don't have any new mail.

this has been discussed several times now.
please search on google groups about it.
i'd prefer to say "consult the faq", but,
well, that's another dead thing about mutt.

Sven

From:	Fabian Braennstroem
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	10 Jan 2005 15:12:08 GMT

On 2005-01-10, Sven Guckes wrote:
> * Fabian Braennstroem [2005-01-10]:
> > I having some problem with the handling of new and old mail, again.
> > Somehow I still couldn't figure it out how to handle it. I actually
> > thought that that mutt indicates the folders with new mail
> > with 'N' in the folder browser and the main menu status bar
> > indicates how many of these folders have new messages.
>
> well - wrong.
>
> > My problem is that I mostly see almost all of
> > my folders even if they don't have any new mail.
>
> this has been discussed several times now.
> please search on google groups about it.
> i'd prefer to say "consult the faq", but,
> well, that's another dead thing about mutt.

It works with:
--enable-buffy-size

Thanks!

Greetings, Fabian

From:	Alain Bench
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 15:03:26 +0100 (CET)

On Monday, January 17, 2005 at 7:57:44 AM +0000, Fabian Braennstroem wrote:

> On 2005-01-15, Alain Bench wrote:
>> fix the real underlying problem [...] Remove "noatime" mount option
> Is it so bad to do the workaround with the 'buffy-size'? My default
> 'fstab'-comments say that the 'noatime'-option is for better
> perfomance.

So the question is more: Is "noatime" good or bad? It disables a
normal feature of the filesystem: No more writing inode's atime on file
read. Less work, so saves a little bit of time. What practical effect on
perfomance? It depends on disk activity, cpu load, caches, etc. Disk
caches tend to hide part of the benefit.

But apps relying on this feature break. You have a (dirty)
workaround for Mutt. But other apps? Mail related, or backup tools,
monitoring utils, IDSes, and whatever else.

An admin aware of all this, pros and cons, and able to take care of
drawbacks both today and tomorrow can well decide to use "noatime" for a
given partition in given conditions. My advice: If unsure, don't use it.

> Maybe, I should make a new partition.

That may be a good approach. I have "noatime" on one partition only,
/var/spool/news/, because when I experimented it was the only one to
give me an interesting speed gain/side effects ratio. IIRC perf gain on
mail spool was zero.

>> BTW a new folder (atime) and a folder with new messages (Status:) are
>> 2 different things nearly unrelated.
> What do you mean with that?

For Mutt, a New folder can contain only Old (or even read) mails.
Like when procmail reroutes old mails (with "Status: O" header) to the
mailbox. You get N and red color in browser, but no N nor color in
index.

And an old folder can contain New mails: Like when you open an old
mailbox, and in index do

("N$%x" by default). You get the contrary: No N-flag in "mutt -y"
browser, but one red N-message in index.

Bye! Alain.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

From:	Paul Walker
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:17:26 +0000 (UTC)

On 10 Jan 2005 13:33:23 GMT, Sven Guckes wrote:

>> thought that that mutt indicates the folders with new mail
>> with 'N' in the folder browser and the main menu status bar
>> indicates how many of these folders have new messages.
> well - wrong.

He's right, actually. But there you go.

--
Paul

From:	Sven Guckes
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	11 Jan 2005 22:44:01 GMT

* Paul Walker [2005-01-11]:
> On 10 Jan 2005 13:33:23 GMT, Sven Guckes wrote:
>
>>> thought that that mutt indicates the folders with new mail
>>> with 'N' in the folder browser and the main menu status bar
>>> indicates how many of these folders have new messages.
>> well - wrong.
>
> He's right, actually. But there you go.

oops. i read "..how many new messages these folders have."
blame it on too much use of UPN.. :-/

Sven

From:	D P Schreber
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	10 Jan 2005 16:55:38 GMT

On 2005-01-10, Sven Guckes wrote:
>> My problem is that I mostly see almost all of
>> my folders even if they don't have any new mail.
>
> this has been discussed several times now.

In the context of hfs+ filesystems in darwin/osx. This guy seems to be
running Linux, or at least he runs slrn there.

Btw the hfs+ problem is supposedly fixed in 10.4.

From:	Alain Bench
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:13:13 +0100 (CET)

Hello Fabian,

On Monday, January 10, 2005 at 3:12:08 PM +0000, Fabian Braennstroem wrote:

>> * Fabian Braennstroem [2005-01-10]:
>>> I mostly see almost all of my folders even if they don't have any
>>> new mail.
> It works with: --enable-buffy-size

Better drop this dirty workaround and fix the real underlying
problem. Linux? Ext[23] filesystem? Remove "noatime" mount option on the
partition containing mailboxes.

BTW a new folder (atime) and a folder with new messages (Status:)
are 2 different things nearly unrelated.

Bye! Alain.
--
A "Reply-To:" header field pointing to the same email address
as the "From:" is uselessly redundant: A loss of space.

From:	Fabian Braennstroem
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	17 Jan 2005 07:57:44 GMT

Hi,

On 2005-01-15, Alain Bench wrote:
> Hello Fabian,
>
> On Monday, January 10, 2005 at 3:12:08 PM +0000, Fabian Braennstroem wrote:
>
> >> * Fabian Braennstroem [2005-01-10]:
> >>> I mostly see almost all of my folders even if they don't have any
> >>> new mail.
> > It works with: --enable-buffy-size
>
> Better drop this dirty workaround and fix the real underlying
> problem. Linux? Ext[23] filesystem? Remove "noatime" mount option on the
> partition containing mailboxes.

Thanks! Yes, it is ext3. Is it so bad to do the workaround
with the 'buffy-size'? My default 'fstab'-comments say that
the 'noatime'-option is for better perfomance. I actually
would like to keep that. Maybe, I should make a new
partition.

> BTW a new folder (atime) and a folder with new messages (Status:)
> are 2 different things nearly unrelated.

What do you mean with that?

Greetings, Fabian

From:	Peter H. Coffin
Subject:	Re: again: folder with new mail
Date:	Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:59:11 -0600

On 17 Jan 2005 07:57:44 GMT, Fabian Braennstroem wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2005-01-15, Alain Bench wrote:
>> Hello Fabian,
>>
>> On Monday, January 10, 2005 at 3:12:08 PM +0000, Fabian Braennstroem wrote:
>>
>> > It works with: --enable-buffy-size
>>
>> Better drop this dirty workaround and fix the real underlying
>> problem. Linux? Ext[23] filesystem? Remove "noatime" mount option on the
>> partition containing mailboxes.
>
> Thanks! Yes, it is ext3. Is it so bad to do the workaround
> with the 'buffy-size'? My default 'fstab'-comments say that
> the 'noatime'-option is for better perfomance. I actually
> would like to keep that. Maybe, I should make a new
> partition.

Turn it off. See if you *notice* a difference. If you don't, who cares
what the fstab comments say? (I'll save my rant about "unneedful
optimalizations vs unneedful expensive features" for another time.)

--
6. I will not gloat over my enemies' predicament before killing them.
--Peter Anspach's list of things to do as an Evil Overlord