Do I need idled on or not?

[Andreas Hasenack]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 12:05:22PM -0600, Richard Wohlstadter wrote:
> Andreas Hasenack wrote:
> >
> >Note that idled has nothing to do with IDLE support or not: IDLE is
> >always there. The only difference is in the method: without the daemon,
> >the check is done at some poll interval (default 60s IIRC).
> 
> Is the IDLE daemon more reliable than the polling?  I've noticed in 

It's faster.

> Thunderbird that IDLE is not very reliable.  Many times I've had folders 
> set to IDLE show 'x' new messages and when I click the folder there is 
> actually more new messages than shown in the count.  I did some sniffer 
> tests to see the polling in action and sometimes I'll see cyrus indicate 
> to thunderbird that a new message is there and thunderbird completely 
> ignores the message.  Maybe newer versions of thunderbird behave better 
> (I tested 2 releases ago) but if anyone else has seen this behavior I 
> was wondering if you tried IDLED daemon and it handled things better.

I tried it once with fetchmail, where it worked very well. I didn't have
to tell fetchmail to poll the mailbox, it just waited for cyrus'
trigger.

With idled, that trigger was "instantaneous", while with cyrus' poll
method (no idled daemon) it could obviously take as long as the poll
interval.

Now I access the imap server directly and idle isn't that important to
me anymore because I have tons of mailboxes which can receive new mail.