From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/80059 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Christensen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Gnus registry upgrade didn't import old registry Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:07:35 -0400 Message-ID: <87k48uzqjc.fsf@uwo.ca> References: <87ehzkh4j2.fsf@uwo.ca> <87litbxd7x.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87vcsf11gb.fsf@uwo.ca> <874nzzvue0.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317089342 16210 80.91.229.12 (27 Sep 2011 02:09:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 02:09:02 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M28353@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Sep 27 04:08:58 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R8N6Q-0006DZ-EI for ding-account@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:08:58 +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 1R8N5N-00075X-4X; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:07:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1R8N5K-00075J-D3 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:07:50 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1R8N5I-0004hH-NR for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 21:07:49 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1R8N5G-000772-N5 for ding@gnus.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:07:46 +0200 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R8N5G-00060m-6q for ding@gnus.org; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:07:46 +0200 Original-Received: from cpe0023bee5dd21-cm0023bee5dd1e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com ([99.249.62.111]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:07:46 +0200 Original-Received: from jdc by cpe0023bee5dd21-cm0023bee5dd1e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:07:46 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 18 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cpe0023bee5dd21-cm0023bee5dd1e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Mail-Copies-To: never Cancel-Lock: sha1:vc8TCt+fbHomGsq1fHRv1xGCv1A= X-Spam-Score: -5.4 (-----) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:80059 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:41:08 -0400 Dan Christensen wrote: > > DC> Oh, is it normal that the .eieio file is a few times bigger than the > DC> .eld file? For 10000 entries, my .eld file is 1MB and my .eieio file > DC> is 3MB. > > It's all done by EIEIO so I haven't worried about the size. We store > more information, perhaps that's why. Is the size the same between the > old and the new registry? I believe I used 10000 in both cases, and that's reinforced by the message gnus-registry-import-eld gave when reading the old one. I don't mind that it's bigger, since it saves more quickly. Dan