From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/33981
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Steinar Bang <sb@metis.no>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: nnimap bottlenecks? (Was: nnimap: article moving)
Date: 02 Jan 2001 20:54:40 +0100
Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu
Message-ID: <whae9991bz.fsf_-_@viffer.computas.no>
References: <87elymc13u.fsf@lovi.inf.elte.hu>
	<ilug0j2qn1a.fsf@barbar.josefsson.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035169991 28026 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:13:11 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:13:11 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu>
Original-Received: from spinoza.math.uh.edu (spinoza.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.18])
	by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46761D049D
	for <jason@mastaler.com>; Tue,  2 Jan 2001 14:57:27 -0500 (EST)
Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5])
	by spinoza.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAB22657;
	Tue, 2 Jan 2001 13:56:57 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Tue, 02 Jan 2001 13:56:21 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from mailhost.sclp.com (postfix@66-209.196.61.interliant.com [209.196.61.66] (may be forged))
	by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA09695
	for <ding@hpc.uh.edu>; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 13:56:11 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from viffer.bang.priv.no (c96-s55-r14h3.upc.chello.no [213.46.211.96])
	by mailhost.sclp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71AE2D049D
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Tue,  2 Jan 2001 14:56:34 -0500 (EST)
Original-Received: (from sb@localhost)
	by viffer.bang.priv.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA00871;
	Tue, 2 Jan 2001 20:55:32 +0100
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
In-Reply-To: <ilug0j2qn1a.fsf@barbar.josefsson.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/20.4 (Emerald)
Precedence: list
X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7
Original-Lines: 16
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:33981
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:33981

>>>>> Simon Josefsson <sj@extundo.com>:

> NAGY Andras <nagya@inf.elte.hu> writes:
>> Been curious how efficiently nnimap works

> Nnimap is painfully slow.

> At some point (or rather an interval) in time, I hope to extend the
> Gnus<->backend interface to make IMAP groups work much faster.
> Don't blame IMAP for nnimap speed, IMAP can be very fast.

I'm curious: what are the current bottleneck(s) of nnimap?

>>From messages in the minibuffer, it seems that on a `g' it waits for
the completion of the check for new articles in each group, before
skipping to the next.  Is this one of the bottlenecks?