Hi Graham,
My apologies, I wasn't very clear - these users have their own inboxes - I
should wrote - they share similiarities in their environments in that their
computer set-up, binaries and size of their inboxes are the same (rather
large) as opposed to they literally share the same box...
Regards,
David
At 11:08 AM 6/5/2006, you wrote:
>David,
>
>If you have two people trying to access the same IMAP Inbox (or even the
>same person trying two instances of IMAP connections) there is going to be
>contention while the processes switch locks. Unless I miss something
>fundamental, this will happen with most IMAP clients. The presumption is
>that an Inbox belongs to a single account with one active users.
>
>Increasing the check frequency will actually exacerbate the problem
>because the liklihood of conflicts is increased. Make sure the check rate
>on one system is an even number, and the other is a prime. That should
>reduce the conflicts, but not eradicate them.
>
>If the inboxes are local Windows files then I would still expect some
>contention.
>
>Duplicate inboxes with the master updating the slave copy might work.
>Rsync or Robocopy, depending on where the file lives. But it sounds like
>you need peer access.
>
>If you do find out a way to do it, please don't make too much nose about
>it. I can think of a few people around here who would consider it a neat
>idea 8-(
>
>Graham
>
>--
>Graham Patterson, System Administration
>Dept. of Economics, UC Berkeley (510)643-5397
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following was automatically added to this message by the list server:
For information about Micronet, including subscribing to
or unsubscribing from its mailing list and finding out
about upcoming meetings, please visit the Micronet Web site:
<http://micronet.berkeley.edu/>.
Received on Mon Jun 5 11:17:28 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jun 05 2006 - 11:17:28 PDT