Tim wrote:
Tim:
That's easy: Fetch a scad of mail when you have filters set, versus
fetch a scad of mail when you don't have any filters set.
Unmolested, they romp into the inbox very quickly. When filtering
puts its fingers in, it's far worse than fetching mail over dial-up.
James Wilkinson:
That sort of filtering speed (I’m guessing maybe a couple of seconds
per message on emails generally smaller than, say, 128 KB) makes me
suspect that it’s passing emails through SpamAssassin – it sounds like
the right speed for SpamAssassin, and there’s an
evolution-spamassassin package to enable it.
Nup, not doing that here. I even disable the Evolution plugins that I'm
not using.
The filtering was just a few filters for mailing lists which look for a
matching "reply-to" header. Each filter was just the match rule,
followed by a stop processing instruction. With about two filters (e.g.
for two mailing lists), it's reasonable. With about three, it's getting
annoying. Try and filter from about eight different lists, and it's far
too slow to put up with.
I've seen a few other similar comments about the slowness of filtering
over the years.
I will second that this has been an issue for some time. I had this
issue when we moved to Exchange Server a few years ago. I found a way
around using Evolution and have not looked back.
When downloading mail it would take forever to get the mail and sort it
out using the OWA interface (Only Option). Using SpamAssasin just made
it worse.
--
Robin Laing
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
