Re: No Gnus 0.3 slower than Oort Gnus 0.24 spam handling

Re: No Gnus 0.3 slower than Oort Gnus 0.24 spam handling

[Ted Zlatanov]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gnu.emacs.gnus as well.

On 17 Mar 2006, alberto.l@nospam.net wrote:

> I recently upgraded from Oort 0.24 to No 0.30 and my spam handling has
> become quite slow.  Here is my situation:
>
> - I use nnfolder mail storage
> my spam handling configuration (using bogofilter):
> - splits spam into mail.spam.temp
> - on exiting, spam in all groups is moved to mail.spam.save
> - mail.spam.temp and mail.spam.save are spam groups
> - the spam process destination for mail.spam.save is nil
>
> When I enter mail.spam.temp to check for false spam positives, on
> quitting it all spam-marked messages are moved to mail.spam.save.
> This is quite slower with No 0.30 w.r.t. Oort 0.24 because,
> apparently, both mail.spam.temp and mail.spam.save are written to
> disk each time a single message is moved.  With Oort 0.24 as far as I
> can understand both groups are written to disk only once.

Alberto,

thank you for the comments.

Some people on the 'ding' mailing list (which is the main vehicle for
Gnus development) have commented that nnfolder is much slower with
CVS Emacs than with the older releases.  Could this be part of the
problem?

Also, is it possible for you to use the CVS version of Gnus, so we can
debug this problem against the latest version of spam.el?

Thanks again
Ted

Re: No Gnus 0.3 slower than Oort Gnus 0.24 spam handling

[Ted Zlatanov]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gnu.emacs.gnus as well.

On 21 Mar 2006, alberto.l@nospam.net wrote:

> That's OK, I will look how to get the CVS version.

Great.  Can we continue this discussion on the ding mailing list?

Ding Mailing List <ding@gnus.org>

I'll try to fix all the problems you've noted, I just want to make
sure they are still broken in the CVS release.

Ted