Re: performance respooling articles in nnmbox or nnbabyl

[larsi@ifi.uio.no (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen)]

gsstark@mit.edu (Greg Stark) writes:

> I think a reasonable solution to this would be to have an optional 
> nnchoke-request-move-articles that took an assoc list of article 
> numbers and groups to move them to.  Only backends for which this 
> allowed a more efficient implementation would provide this function.
> For nnmbox and nnbabyl -request-move-articles could store all the
> moved articles in a temporary buffer and insert them all at the end
> of the operation.

That wouldn't be too much work, actually.  It could even be done
without adding an extra backend interface function.

For each article:

1)  Request the article; put it in a temp buffer; clean it up to
remove all old Gnusey headers.

2)  Delete the article.

Then we'd have one temp buffer with all the "removed" articles, and
one could just point `nnchoke-request-scan' to that buffer/file to
pretend that it's an incoming spool and run it through the split
methods.

Hmn.  This would lose all article marks, though.

-- 
  "Yes.  The journey through the human heart 
     would have to wait until some other time."