Re: Huge groups

[Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>]

Stefan Waldherr <swa@cs.cmu.edu> writes:

> >>>>> "Jason" == Jason L Tibbitts <tibbs@hpc.uh.edu> writes:
> 
> >>>>> "SB" == Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no> writes:
>   SB> A faster backend? Are there some formats that could be used? Isn't the
>   SB> qmail native format supposed to be fast? (at least according to Dan
>   SB> Bernstein...)
> 
>   Jason> Well, I think it would be hard to get much faster than nnml.  You
>   Jason> could have something like nnfolder but keep an overview file that
> 
> I think that nnml is pretty darn slow wrt speed. Selecting a group
> with, say, 800 articles takes 11s on my machines. This is XEmacs,
> not Emacs (it seems to be a little faster under Emacs). Exmh on the
> other hand, which I used previously, takes for the same group far
> less than 5s. I would really like to find out if other people have
> equivalent times ...

This has nothing with the merits of nnml compared to speed of other
formats.  The overhead you see is due to the speed (slowness) of Emacs 
Lisp, and various display bottlenecks.

-- 
Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr> | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia
--------------------------------+--------------------------------
* Q: What is an experienced Emacs user?
* A: A person who wishes that the terminal had pedals.