From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/9790
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: nnmail-split-it
Date: 04 Feb 1997 02:55:34 +0100
Sender: larsi@proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no
Message-ID: <m2raixpc6h.fsf@proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no>
References: <xofiv4aual5.fsf@blubb.pdc.kth.se> <rvraixqxkn.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu> <r9q3evdpde3.fsf@snowking.cs.washington.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035149760 20555 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:36:00 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:36:00 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <ding-request@ifi.uio.no>
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2])
	by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA11298
	for <steve@miranova.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 1997 19:03:23 -0800
Original-Received: from proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no (root@xyplex15.uio.no [129.240.154.35]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <DAA24154@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 03:53:41 +0100
Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by proletcult.slip.ifi.uio.no (8.8.2/8.8.2) id CAA01765; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 02:55:37 +0100
Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no
In-Reply-To: Paul Franklin's message of 03 Feb 1997 17:29:24 -0800
Original-Lines: 23
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.11/Emacs 19.34
X-Face: &w!^oO<W.WBH]FsTP:P0f9X6M-ygaADlA_)eF$<UwQzj7:C=Gi<a?/_4$LX^@$Qq7-O&XHp
 lDARi8e8iT<(A$LWAZD*xjk^')/wI5nG;1cNB>~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\<y
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9790
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9790

Paul Franklin <paul@cs.washington.edu> writes:

> Hmm.  I wrote some elisp code to do splitting like this.  I didn't
> distribute it because:
> 
> * I realized that the bottleneck was disk access time (over NFS).

The box I'm sitting with now is a 486/slow without NFS, and splitting
is kinda slow here as well.

> It generates a alist of headers, unwrapping lines within headers and
> separating values from duplicate headers with "\n".  You then match
> with a header or multiple ones concatenated (very useful, for me at
> least).  I never compared them with the default split rules, but I'm
> fairly sure that this code is tight enough that it's very unlikely to
> be a bottleneck.

We should probably wait with this until the total mail
splitting/fetching makeover in Quassia Gnus.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
  larsi@ifi.uio.no * Lars Ingebrigtsen