Re: many articles

[Phil Humpherys <phumpherys@utah-inter.net>]

Matt Simmons <simmonmt@acm.org> writes:

> Of course, 32M (I assume the 32M above is the chip RAM, and the
> 128M is swap) is basically a joke for running XEmacs (I assume
> the same is true for GNU Emacs) under X, to say nothing of
> groups with tens of thousands of messages.  I have 224M, and it
> still kills me.  Of course, it's not swapping, but it still has
> a mountain of data to chew through[1].

Matt, thanks for your response.  Yes, I recognize that a "mere"
32M of ram isn't very much anymore.  It is sufficient for all my
other tasks running emacs.  It's only on these very large groups
that it kinda dies.

Now, if I were to run mh (or even mh-e), I'd have absolutely no
problems with these large groups (or folders as the case may be).
Hence, my complaint.

One soolution I can think of is to run gnus with an mh backend,
and when I needto do something with these really large groups, I
bail on [x]emacs and go straight mh.  Then, I can always come
back to xemacs later whenever I want.

I think I'd like to explore this further, but there's very little
documentation I can find on gnus specifics with the mh backend.
If anyone one there has some experience here I'd appreciate some
feedback.  The examples in the gnus manual are very sparse.

> According to top, the footprint of my current XEmacs is 43M
> (though only 27M is swapped in at the moment).  You really should go
> buy more RAM if you'd like to keep your sanity.

Well, this may be an option down the road, but for now it simply
isn't.  Instead, I'm going to have to modify how I interact with
my email somewhat.  I'm dedicated to staying with gnus, but I'm
going to have make it work with mh as I've described above.

Thanks again for your response.  I'd appreciate any further help
or suggestions.

--
Phil Humpherys <phumpherys@utah-inter.net>   DriverSoft
Unix Systems Administrator                   Mobile: +1.801.725.3257 
WWW/PGPkeys: http://www.spire.com/~humphery