From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/84635 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Peter_M=C3=BCnster?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: entering a group is slow Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:45:19 +0200 Message-ID: <874mzhs05s.fsf@micropit.roche-blanche.homenet.org> References: <87mwdhmb9y.fsf@micropit.roche-blanche.homenet.org> <87ha3pszqe.fsf@gmail.com> <87d2ecj48r.fsf@micropit.roche-blanche.homenet.org> <877g4g9d5r.fsf@micropit.roche-blanche.homenet.org> <877g4fgbwb.fsf@pinto.chemeng.ucl.ac.uk> <87vbrz9a49.fsf@micropit.roche-blanche.homenet.org> <87lhsu3afl.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <877g4e7exl.fsf@micropit.roche-blanche.homenet.org> <87wqceuqac.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <87oaxqrkze.fsf@micropit.roche-blanche.homenet.org> <87vbrxs5wv.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1403171179 32002 80.91.229.3 (19 Jun 2014 09:46:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 09:46:19 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M32878@lists.math.uh.edu Thu Jun 19 11:46:12 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WxYv5-0003vc-06 for ding-account@gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:46:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1WxYug-0004fU-EF; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 04:45:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.32]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1WxYue-0004fK-Uw for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 04:45:44 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WxYuU-0004IR-JF for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 04:45:44 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WxYuS-0004N5-MB for ding@gnus.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:45:32 +0200 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WxYuS-0003Fa-4B for ding@gnus.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:45:32 +0200 Original-Received: from arennes-651-1-118-78.w2-2.abo.wanadoo.fr ([2.2.13.78]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:45:32 +0200 Original-Received: from pmlists by arennes-651-1-118-78.w2-2.abo.wanadoo.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 19 Jun 2014 11:45:32 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 33 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: arennes-651-1-118-78.w2-2.abo.wanadoo.fr User-Agent: Gnus/5.130012 (=?utf-8?Q?=E7=9C=9F?= Gnus v0.12) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:S3Cp1b2CRQ8Lg75+fBGPNkWCLm8= X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:84635 Archived-At: On Thu, Jun 19 2014, Eric S Fraga wrote: > On Wednesday, 18 Jun 2014 at 23:00, Peter Münster wrote: > > I am not sure if elp reports cpu time or elapsed (wall clock) > time. I guess elapsed time. But it doesn't matter, because when I do the test, emacs uses 100% CPU time. > Also, remember that my system has 8 cpu cores and large memory. But emacs can only use one core. > Bogomips alone is not a full measure of system capability. What > storage system are you using? I.e. do you have a slow disk? Etc. When I do the test, everything is in memory, no disk reading involved. I have 4GB memory, and the swap area is almost never needed. You are right, bogomips is perhaps not the only parameter for speed. Perhaps the CPU cache is also important here. The speed is acceptable now, with gnus-large-newsgroup = 500, but it would be interesting to know, why emacs becomes slower after some days of uptime... ? Or perhaps I've done something particular, that has made emacs slow? What could it be...? -- Peter