Why is too much stuff in the Inbox a no-no?

[Bud Vitoff]

I'm running WinXP Home SP2.

I've seen warnings about archiving items in Inbox (and others) -- that it
will "overflow" and corrupt the mail handler. I've seen ISP's return emails
because their user filled up his allocated space. I can understand this
occurring either because 1) the user's Inbox actually resides on the ISP's
server or, if not, 2) the user simply has not checked (and downloaded) his
email for a long time. What I don't understand is why there is a problem
with having too much stuff in an Inbox residing on the user's PC. Isn't
this a file that will extend automatically, just as other files do?

I'm posting this same question under Outlook Express -- I suspect there's a
difference.

 

[VanguardLH]

in message
<snip - SAME post as in another newsgroup>


Learn to cross-post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossposting
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htmhttp://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html

A point not made is that N multiposted copies will consume N times the
disk space for each of the separate copies of the same post.
Crossposted messages have just *one* copy on the server with links in
the newsgroups back to the same single copy. Multiposting wastes disk
space on the server. Yes, your post may be small but remember that
you consume N times the space on one server and then do so again on
all the newsgroups servers worldwide. You waste more bandwidth
getting N copies of your multiposted message distributed to all the
newsgroups servers worldwide. Cross-posting has just one copy of the
message on an NNTP server, and only one copy gets propagated to other
NNTP servers.

To those visiting the newsgroups, crossposting helps them see ALL the
replies from those in the other RELATED newsgroup to which you linked
your post. That way, they don't waste their time duplicating similar
replies.

 

[Bud Vitoff]

Ouch! I promise I won't do it again. BTW, your second hyperlink appears to
be no longer valid.

 

[neo [mvp outlook]]

Couple of different takes on this...

Take 1) If you are working with a POP3 mailbox and choose to leave messages
on the server, then it is possible to end up with a full mailbox on the
server. When this happens, the mail server has to option but to return the
message to sender stating that the mailbox is full.

Why you ask do ISPs/Corporate mail systems set quotas on a users mailbox.
Quite simply is has to do with ensuring an equal amount of drive space per
user on "x" mail server(s). Another reason is to ensure that backups of
users mailboxes can complete within a given time window.

If you choose not to keep messages on the server (which is the default by
the way for OE/Outlook), you will never run into this problem because the
items are removed from the server once your mail client downloads the
message.


Take 2) So lets assume that you are working with a POP3 mailbox and use the
default configuration where items are not left on server after checking.
OE/Outlook do have file size limits in regards to their data sotrage files.
Since this group focuses on Outlook, I'm just going to talk about Microsft
Outlook at this point.

Depending on the version of Microsoft Outlook you are using, the PST file
can only grow so big. For example Outlook 97/2002, the maximum size for a
PST file is 2GB. Now within 1 PST file, there are limits on how many
items/folders that it can contain. Assuming that large table support is on
for the PST file (which is the default for Outlook 2002 but has to be turned
on for Outlook 97/2000), then item/folder count is just a tad over 65,500
items per folder.

In Outlook 2003, Microsoft introduced a new PST file format. The new format
is not limited to the size restrictions that Outlook 97/2002 have. Outlook
2003/2007 support the legacy format as well. It should be noted that if you
open a legacy PST file in Outlook 2003/7 it doesn't up convert the file. It
stays legacy format and is bound to the item/size limit mentioned for
Outlook 97/2002.


Okay with all that said, is it still bad to have a lot of items in your
Inbox. The answer here is yes. Outlook will slowly bog down after time
when certian default folders (e.g. Inbox, Calendar, .etc) have tons of items
in them. The reason why is that Outlook has to poll these folders to either
display them to you. To give you an idea since I primarly use Outlook with
Microsoft Exchange, you can see start seeing a lenghty startup time when
there are 10,000+ items in the Inbox. Now couple this with other things
like real-time antivirus wanting to scan the PST file at the time outlook is
starting or desktop search programs gearing up to keep their indexes up to
date, you can easily see why things start to hang up when the mechanics of a
hard drive can only read/write so fast.

 

[VanguardLH]

in message

your second hyperlink appears to be no longer valid.

Miss a carriage return (or keyboard couldn't keep up with my fast
typing). Fixed now.