From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/87700
Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: spam move is very slow
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:00:48 +0200
Organization: Probably a good idea
Message-ID: <86wp4gh5f3.fsf@dod.no>
References: <871smqmvhl.fsf@chopper> <861smpihi1.fsf@dod.no>
	<87a81djnn1.fsf@chopper>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1506765734 12482 195.159.176.226 (30 Sep 2017 10:02:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 10:02:14 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (windows-nt)
To: ding@gnus.org
Original-X-From: ding-owner+m35914@lists.math.uh.edu Sat Sep 30 12:02:11 2017
Return-path: <ding-owner+m35914@lists.math.uh.edu>
Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org
Original-Received: from mxfilter-048034.atla03.us.yomura.com ([107.189.48.34])
	by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <ding-owner+m35914@lists.math.uh.edu>)
	id 1dyEb2-0002av-GQ
	for ding-account@gmane.org; Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:02:08 +0200
X-Yomura-MXScrub: 1.0
Original-Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu (unknown [129.7.128.208])
	by mxfilter-048034.atla03.us.yomura.com (Halon) with ESMTPS
	id 6da802bd-a5c6-11e7-8b7f-b499baa2b07a;
	Sat, 30 Sep 2017 10:02:12 +0000 (UTC)
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu)
	by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.87)
	(envelope-from <ding-owner+M35914@lists.math.uh.edu>)
	id 1dyEa9-0008Qb-NP; Sat, 30 Sep 2017 05:01:13 -0500
Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33])
	by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.87)
	(envelope-from <junkmaster@quimby.gnus.org>)
	id 1dyEa6-0008Pz-43
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sat, 30 Sep 2017 05:01:10 -0500
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51])
	by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.87)
	(envelope-from <junkmaster@quimby.gnus.org>)
	id 1dyEa4-00015Z-02
	for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sat, 30 Sep 2017 05:01:09 -0500
Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (helo=blaine.gmane.org)
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
	(Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <ding-account@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1dyEa2-0008Ha-I0
	for ding@gnus.org; Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:01:06 +0200
Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <ding-account@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1dyEZg-0004UB-QJ
	for ding@gnus.org; Sat, 30 Sep 2017 12:00:44 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org
Original-Lines: 7
Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org
Mail-Copies-To: never
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EAEGGxhoMApAl/lood3hv0eVguM=
List-ID: <ding.gnus.org>
Precedence: bulk
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:87700
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/87700>

>>>>> joakim@verona.se:

> I also tested with just marking the spams with the process mark, #, and
> then moving them with B m. This is much faster than using the spam
> function to move the spam. Does this still support the above idea?

No, that would seem to undermine the theory...