From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/74242 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Francis Moreau Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Improving Gnus speed Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 08:57:43 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87zktemkwl.fsf@uwo.ca> <87vd42mdci.fsf@uwo.ca> <87y68vhj3q.fsf@uwo.ca> <87sjz3h9zo.fsf@uwo.ca> <871v6el86z.fsf@uwo.ca> <87k4k6jnmy.fsf@uwo.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1290412747 9796 80.91.229.12 (22 Nov 2010 07:59:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 07:59:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org To: Dan Christensen Original-X-From: ding-owner+M22607@lists.math.uh.edu Mon Nov 22 08:59:03 2010 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 1PKRIj-0004Kk-LD for ding-account@gmane.org; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 08:59:01 +0100 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 1PKRI7-0001Zq-9m; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 01:58:23 -0600 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 1PKRI5-0001Zb-J4 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 01:58:21 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx1.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PKRI3-0007y9-Tt for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 01:58:20 -0600 Original-Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com ([74.125.82.172]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1PKRI3-0006TO-00 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 08:58:19 +0100 Original-Received: by wyb29 with SMTP id 29so6861235wyb.17 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 23:57:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:cc:subject:references :date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=w0Kx21luI2z9SPTxQB2+j9eXElnl6ma2OUdkgqcV64Q=; b=L3tGTH4+AkqrzbckwUCzTOSfwFYzxxmVMsu5NMlEvBwFCzdQSgcecxGi5zGAhONghv GsJhiPtN2LyNUB/ePyGxdrSFUcW0FfmaVLKVEEPYoWj6DR8zk8KAMCpCZQuPz10PoOdb 608fKkwDPcmPvojwwx4zwZoy2H6k7G+PTJ4EY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=VdeNYWQGWI8kQTT73TCT+3EyMSiWks5XpDxbd9DIiGywMtC5bLNE60D5hBSgBIt7mb sVSGT1ifIGLIhC8yxGsPEcuOU3SWB1FSPj6Z2kpJ2NuEVQP4+btwDAn85DEXGT0tsTYb ceg/ekAXIcDWTCMzlDNTTO3O1NpXPIoHUB7Uo= Original-Received: by 10.227.128.204 with SMTP id l12mr5499856wbs.136.1290412668298; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 23:57:48 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (au213-1-82-235-205-153.fbx.proxad.net [82.235.205.153]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x23sm2112690weq.10.2010.11.21.23.57.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 21 Nov 2010 23:57:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87k4k6jnmy.fsf@uwo.ca> (Dan Christensen's message of "Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:52:05 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:74242 Archived-At: Dan Christensen writes: > Francis Moreau writes: > >> Yes but I still think that the wrong approach is currently done because >> all this sorting is mostly done for nothing. >> >> When I'm entering in the group, all threads are hidden. And I won't look >> at 80% of the actual threads. So sorting them are useless. >> >> I really think that sorting should happen only when threads are >> expanded. And that would reduce a _lot_ the number of threads to sort. > > I may be wrong, but I think that rearranging the articles in the summary > buffer is a little complicated in Gnus. I don't think there's any > reason that the thread sorting needs to take a significant amount of > time if done correctly. > > Moreover, I never hide threads, so I want them sorted correctly from the > start. Sure but in that case all threads are expanded so also sorted. I don't want to pay the price to sort them all because I won't read most of them, and when I don't read a thread I just want it to be hidden (colapsed). So it's really: "do the job when it's really needed." -- Francis