From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/59560 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Abrahams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: IMAP article move Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:41:30 -0500 Message-ID: References: <4nr7n4b12g.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1105389372 6876 80.91.229.6 (10 Jan 2005 20:36:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:36:12 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+M8100@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Jan 10 21:35:59 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13] ident=mail) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Co6Gc-0000sl-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 21:35:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1Co6EP-0006mW-00; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:33:42 -0600 Original-Received: from util2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.23]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1Co5Qz-0006kj-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:42:37 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by util2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1Co5Qp-0005qU-46 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:42:27 -0600 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Co5Qn-0005v7-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:42:25 +0100 Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Co5Qn-0008CB-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:42:25 +0100 Original-Received: from 146-115-127-135.c3-0.smr-ubr2.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com ([146.115.127.135]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:42:25 +0100 Original-Received: from dave by 146-115-127-135.c3-0.smr-ubr2.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:42:25 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 30 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 146-115-127-135.c3-0.smr-ubr2.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:59560 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:59560 Simon Josefsson wrote: > "Ted Zlatanov" writes: > >> Can we optimize IMAP article moves so they use the server >> capabilities? Right now, I think, we just copy and then delete the >> old article. Across various backends that makes sense, but if it's >> within the same IMAP backend, the server move can be much faster. >> >> I looked at gnus-sum.el, gnus-int.el, and nnimap.el. It seems >> possible, although the changes would have to go all the way to the >> top, because gnus-summary-move-article does the copy & delete action. >> >> If this works, Gnus will be much faster and more reliable in the >> common case of article moves in IMAP. > > What are you proposing? There is some optimization in > nnimap-request-move-article and nnimap-request-accept-article to make > moving more efficient, and I thought it was pretty fast. But I rarely > copy/move articles, so I wouldn't know. Maybe you could illustrate by > comparing which IMAP commands are sent now, and which commands you > want to be sent? The thing that seems to hurt usability the most for me is that Gnus rebuilds the summary buffer after each message is moved in a multiple-message move. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com