From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/7608 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: joe.hildebrand@twcable.com Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Status of the nndb backend Date: Thu, 15 Aug 96 10:45:38 MST Message-ID: <9607158401.AA840127975@dencmis93.comm.twcable.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035147896 7827 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:04:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:04:56 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@ifi.uio.no Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA22538 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 1996 11:03:30 -0700 Original-Received: from dencbis94.twcable.com (dencbis94.twcable.com [205.138.118.193]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Thu, 15 Aug 1996 18:47:58 +0200 Original-Received: from denmisf01.twcable.com by dencbis94.twcable.com with SMTP id AA29745 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 15 Aug 1996 10:41:25 -0600 Original-Received: from dencmis93.comm.twcable.com (dencmis94.comm.twcable.com) by denmisf01.twcable.com with SMTP id AA20437 (5.67a/IDA-1.5); Thu, 15 Aug 1996 10:50:20 -0600 Original-Received: from ccMail by dencmis93.comm.twcable.com (SMTPLINK V2.10.05) id AA840127975; Thu, 15 Aug 96 10:45:38 MST Encoding: 44 Text Original-To: kees_de_bruin@tasking.nl, Kai Grossjohann , davidb@internic.net Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7608 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:7608 >>>>> Kees de Bruin writes: KdB> Hello, I followed the discussion about the nndb backend, but KdB> recently nothing has been said about it anymore. Is it still KdB> under development, can it already be used, or what? The reason you haven't seen anything is that both Dave Blacka and myself moved to new jobs a few months ago. My new job uses cc:Mail (which really, truly sucks rocks) on Windows (I have a windows box just to read mail. cost effective, no?), so I wasn't able to do any of my own mail processing. Dave is now at Network Solutions, doing rwhois development, so he has a lot less time than he did. I am moving to a new, new, job next week. Perhaps there I'll have the infrastructure in place to do more work on nndb. 0.14 should be usable; both Dave and I were using it as our primary mail spooling tool. We had both stopped using procmail, even. Kai> I wish I had time to do any work on it. Back when I had time, I Kai> tried to run nndb which dumped core while indexing messages. As Kai> I know next to nothing about Perl I was unable to find the Kai> error. I don't think we were ever able to reproduce this. Perhaps it was a low memory or disk space condition? I was able to index several thousand articles without a problem, but I had a Sparc20, with about 8G of disk and ~128M of main memory. Kai> I have tried to use nndb-0.14 and to issue the UPDATE command, Kai> which updated a few groups then barfed. This is with the Kai> Berkeley DB backend on Perl 5.002. Has anybody got this Kai> working? Maybe I just ought to try gdbm? I think we decided that the Berkeley DBs were too big, and changed the default to gdbm. But I don't remember. Do you, Dave? We did a bunch of performance tests (for a work-related project) on the relative sizes and speeds of gdbm vs. berkeley. I remember the verdict being that the gdbm databases were smaller, and faster as long as you weren't accessing them via NFS. Over NFS, gdbm was *dog* slow. Like 8-10 times as slow. So if you use gdbm, put your databases on a local disk. Despite all of that, I would suggest mostly using the defaults, if you can, since that is the most tested case.