On -10.01.-28163 20:59, Greg Sullivan wrote:
I must say I am extremely disappointed that intra-account moves are not atomic. As far as I can tell, IMAP was designed to allow shared access, so in my opinion this operation should be atomic. Heaven FORBID that I should ask for entire conversation moves to be atomic as well. (which is really what I want)
How would it be of any use to the passive client that the *operation* is atomic when (as far as I can see, which admittedly mightn't be much) there is no way defined in the IMAP protocol to atomically *notify* it of said change?
IMAP IDLE, for example, may inform it that one message disappeared from mailbox X and one popped up in mailbox Y - not that these two are actually the same message, still have the same set of flags set, etc.. That's for the client to find out by specific requests - which already breaks the atomicity and allows for a race condition between clients.
Regards, J. Bern
*NEU* - NEC IT-Infrastruktur-Produkte im http://www.linworks-shop.de/: Server--Storage--Virtualisierung--Management SW--Passion for Performance Jochen Bern, Systemingenieur --- LINworks GmbH http://www.LINworks.de/ Postfach 100121, 64201 Darmstadt | Robert-Koch-Str. 9, 64331 Weiterstadt PGP (1024D/4096g) FP = D18B 41B1 16C0 11BA 7F8C DCF7 E1D5 FAF4 444E 1C27 Tel. +49 6151 9067-231, Zentr. -0, Fax -299 - Amtsg. Darmstadt HRB 85202 Unternehmenssitz Weiterstadt, Geschäftsführer Metin Dogan, Oliver Michel