Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!psuvax1!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!apollo!ced
From: ced@apollo.HP.COM (Carl Davidson)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.mush
Subject: Re: Compressed folders
Message-ID: <48677cdf.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Date: 2 Feb 90 14:48:00 GMT
References: <3233@taux01.UUCP>
Sender: root@apollo.HP.COM
Lines: 35

From article <3233@taux01.UUCP>, by crehta@tasu74.UUCP (Ran Ever-Hadani):
> I have a few folders which are large enough, and accessed rarely
> enough that I keep them compressed.  On the other hand, I access
> them frequently enough to consider the manual uncompress and
> re-compress to be a pain.
> 
> Do others share my emotions?  How hard should it be to have mush
> recognize file names ending with .Z in the folder directory
> to be compressed, zcat them into its temporary file, and re-compress
> when a save is issued to that folder?
> 
> -- ran
> -----------------------------------------------
> Reply-To: crehta@taux01.nsc.com (Ran Ever-Hadani)
> Disclaimer: The above is to be attributed to me only, not to any organization.
> Apology: Bad English.  E-mailed spelling and style corrections are welcome.

I, too, have some mail folders that are huge (> 2 Mbytes). The ability
to compress/decompress folders "on-the-fly" would be nice. Even better
would be to store mail messages in a hypertext database. That would allow,
I think, even greater compression by making the storage of common
substrings use radically less space. Of course, this would eliminate the
readability of mail folders with anything but Mush, but I for one would
gladly give that up in return for the savings in storage space and
improved performance.

I also realize that this is a pipe dream, so I would gladly settle for
auto compress/decompress.



Carl Davidson   (508)256-6600 x5967     | I'm going to find myself a girl
Apollo Systems Divison, part of H-P     | who can show me what laughter means.
UUCP: {decvax|mit-eddie}!apollo!ced     | 
ARPA: ced@apollo.COM; ced@apollo.HP.COM |