From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/9307 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Kai Grossjohann Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Quicker exit and re-enter of large groups Date: 08 Jan 1997 17:39:44 +0100 Sender: grossjoh@charly.informatik.uni-dortmund.de Message-ID: References: Reply-To: Kai Grossjohann NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035149351 17689 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:29:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:29:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id IAA03192 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:53:05 -0800 Original-Received: from waldorf.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (waldorf.informatik.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.4.42]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:39:54 +0100 Original-Received: from naunet.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (naunet.informatik.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.20.111]) by waldorf.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (8.8.4/) with SMTP id RAA05532; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:39:46 +0100 (MET) Original-Received: by naunet.informatik.uni-dortmund.de id RAA05491; Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:39:45 +0100 Original-To: Wesley.Hardaker@sphys.unil.ch In-Reply-To: Wesley.Hardaker@sphys.unil.ch's message of 08 Jan 1997 17:21:37 +0100 Original-Lines: 27 X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.76/Emacs 19.34 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9307 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9307 >>>>> Wesley Hardaker writes: Kai> - When I hit M-g in a group and there are new articles is it Kai> possible to just add them to the summary buffer without Kai> regenerating all of it? Wesley> I don't know that you'd get any speed improvement there if Wesley> you did any sort of sorting (by score, for instance), as it Wesley> can't just stick them at the end... Well, suppose there's just one new message, then surely it can be inserted in $O(n)$ time, whereas sorting all messages needs $O(n \log n)$ time, no? The main time killer (at least for me, I sort messages by number and use threading but no other sorting -- no scoring or suchlike) is summary buffer generation which takes the most time. Thus, having to generate only a few lines and just sticking them in at the right positions would be a huge improvement. I'm talking about groups with several thousands of (ticked) messages. Whatcha all think? kai "can I still have an Xmas wish or do I have to wait a year?" -- I wonder why nobody don't like me, or is it de fact dat I'm ugly? -- Harry Belafonte