Re: Evolution vs Kmail/Kontack Observation

[Gustavo Seabra <seabra ksu edu>]

Chadley Wilson wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I recently switched back to fedora from suse9.1
>
> I decided to give good old gnome a bash, but using evolution I noticed that 
> mail retrieving took quite a long time. Well what can you expect from a super 
> busy list.
> The question is why when I switched back to KDE does Kmail retrieve mail so 
> much faster. 
> Going out on a limb here I suppose it has some thing to do with the when and 
> how it sorts mail. I have the same filters in place on kmail as on evolution 
> and am subscribed to 16 mailing lists and 6 news groups.
>
> So the filter I have in place are definatly not the issue, and since kmail is 
> noticabley faster that eliminate the fact that my server could be slow or 
> busy.
>
> In my test which I conducted today I set evolution (currently my default) to 
> leave messages on the server. 
> Tonight I backup my evolution folder, I then configured my account in 
> evolution and kmail both set to leave messages on the server.
>
> Evolution downloaded the 1500 odd emails in 5 minutes while kmail downloaded 
> the same (give or take about 10 mails) in 30 seconds.
>
> Is this a common observation or is there something that is not functioning 
> correctly in my evolution setup?
>
> TIA
>
>  
Just one thought...

Are you positive you are downloading all e-mail messages in both cases? 
Maybe you have one (evolution) set to download the messages immediately, 
and the other (KMail) to only download headers, and the messages only 
when you select them to view.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Gustavo Seabra* 
<http://www.ksu.edu/chem/personnel/faculty/grad/jvo/ortiz/people_seabra.html> 
- Graduate Student
E-Mail: seabra ksu edu <mailto:seabra ksu edu>
Phone: (785) 532-6072 Chemistry Department <http://www.ksu.edu/chem/>
Kansas State University <http://www.ksu.edu>
Manhattan, KS 66506-3701