Re: Query: Patches break with Microsoft exchange server.

On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 12:18 -0400, Avery Pennarun wrote:

There wasn't a lot of point in optimising it.

The current logic, shown in the patch I referenced, is to keep fetching new chunks while the stream position matches the end of the previous chunk we attempted to fetch.

To handle multiple outstanding requests, especially if they can be satisfied out-of-order, would have been more complex because the stream position (in the 'really_fetched' variable) wouldn't necessarily match anything interesting. We'd have to keep more state, and the whole thing would get a lot more intrusive.

Also, for the common case where the server isn't broken and the mail size happens not to fall on a chunk boundary, the current implementation results in no extra fetch requests. Doing otherwise would either mean extra fetch requests even for this common case, or would mean even more complexity to 'catch up' by issuing additional fetch requests as soon as we realise the server lied about RFC822.SIZE (which is when we receive the last chunk, and it runs over the size we expected).

It may be that there's a neat and simple way to handle all of the above, and if so then patches would be welcome -- but personally, I just couldn't be bothered to think too hard about it. There were more pressing matters to attend to, like implementing QRESYNC support.