Re: db-backed mail back end

[Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>]

Karl Kleinpaste <karl@charcoal.com> writes:

> You only had a 3x time factor in the case already seen, for a 200x
> content increase.  Why is there reason to believe that scaling up
> again by a mere 10x will be substantially worse?  If by some fluke you
> should find a full 10x time cost for the 10x size increase of 20K->200K,
> you will encounter a 4-article entry to a 200K group costing a
> stunning...7.5 seconds (based on your 0.25 and 0.75 timings).

Yes.  And that's not acceptable.  If it takes 7.5 seconds to enter a
group to look at the one new article, then that's too slow.  Much,
much, much too slow.

> I'm not trying to be difficult or argumentative.  I'm just trying to
> figure out what problem you're really trying to solve.  So far, I see
> some nebulous idea that "it's slow," without being able to qualify,
> much less quantify, where the problem lies.

Fact is that it's too slow.  And finding out possible solutions to the
problem is the reason for this thread.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen