From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/11698 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kai Grossjohann Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Article count Date: 17 Jul 1997 19:24:49 +0200 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: Kai Grossjohann NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.100) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035151363 31889 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 22:02:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 22:02:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Return-Path: Original-Received: from xemacs.org (xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.252.16]) by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id MAA10439 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 12:29:20 -0700 Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA09481 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 14:26:00 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from claymore.vcinet.com (claymore.vcinet.com [208.205.12.23]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 19:26:56 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 14450 invoked by uid 504); 17 Jul 1997 17:24:55 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 14447 invoked from network); 17 Jul 1997 17:24:54 -0000 Original-Received: from waldorf.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (129.217.4.42) by claymore.vcinet.com with SMTP; 17 Jul 1997 17:24:54 -0000 Original-Received: from petty.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (petty.informatik.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.20.161]) by waldorf.informatik.uni-dortmund.de with SMTP id TAA25004; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 19:24:52 +0200 (MES) Original-Received: by petty.informatik.uni-dortmund.de id TAA19177; Thu, 17 Jul 1997 19:24:51 +0200 Original-To: dsg@mitre.org (David S. Goldberg) In-Reply-To: dsg@linus.mitre.org's message of "17 Jul 1997 13:15:06 -0400" X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.63/Emacs 19.34 Original-Lines: 22 Original-Xref: altair.xemacs.org dgnus-list:2088 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:11698 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:11698 >>>>> David S Goldberg writes: David> Right, I understand that difference between auto and total David> expiry. My question is why should auto-expire make group David> entry faster? Ah. With total-expire, one often ticks those articles that one wants to keep. Many ticked articles ==> large summary buffer size ==> summary buffer generation takes long. Without total-expire, one can just mark those articles as read that one wants to keep. And the important ones can be ticked. Therefore, a typical summary buffer contains only the new articles and the few important ones. Smaller summary buffer ==> faster group entry. I should've made that a lot clearer, I think. kai -- A large number of young women don't trust men with beards. (BFBS Radio)