From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/72108 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Steinar Bang Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: nnimap issues Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:00:25 +0200 Organization: Probably a good idea Message-ID: References: <878w2olqoa.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1285678876 3634 80.91.229.12 (28 Sep 2010 13:01:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:01:16 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M20481@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Sep 28 15:01:11 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P0Znx-0008FK-QP for ding-account@gmane.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:01:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1P0ZnW-0002hA-NA; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 08:00:42 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1P0ZnU-0002gt-Di for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 08:00:40 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P0ZnS-0007vs-5z for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 08:00:39 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1P0ZnR-0006SA-00 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:00:37 +0200 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1P0ZnQ-0007zh-Id for ding@gnus.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:00:37 +0200 Original-Received: from 62.113.137.5 ([62.113.137.5]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:00:36 +0200 Original-Received: from sb by 62.113.137.5 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:00:36 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org Original-Lines: 35 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.113.137.5 Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Jf4+RVWCBI5cdGeJK5uww2gXXy4= X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:72108 Archived-At: >>>>> David Engster : >> But `g' do feel a lot snappier. >> I still have the pre-nnimap version of gnus around. Is there a way to >> objectively time the `g'? (Ie. using elisp, not manual use of wall >> clock...) > I've used > (benchmark-run 50 > (gnus-group-get-new-news)) > to run it 50 times. This will return (total-time number-of-GCs time-for-GCs). Here are my results, both done on emacs 22.3 on RHEL4, Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz: ; New gnus (benchmark-run 50 (gnus-group-get-new-news)) (36.122966999999996 21 1.2593269999999976) ; old gnus (benchmark-run 50 (gnus-group-get-new-news)) (85.283236 67 3.129354) So a bit more than twice the wall clock time. This is with a single IMAP server, and 3 agentized NNTP server, and one un-agentized NNTP server. No local mail folders. The "old gnus" test was done on a freshly gnus in a freshly started emacs, so that should perhaps favour it a bit wrt. GC...? Still, it had over three times the number of GCs run.