From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/5618 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: gsstark@MIT.EDU (Greg Stark) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Catching up Mail Groups Date: 20 Mar 1996 03:13:59 -0500 Organization: Massachvsetts Institvte of Technology Sender: gsstark@fierce-bad-rabbit.MIT.EDU Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035146197 858 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:36:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:36:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@ifi.uio.no Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA06326 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 00:53:42 -0800 Original-Received: from MIT.EDU (PACIFIC-CARRIER-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.69.0.28]) by ifi.uio.no with SMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Wed, 20 Mar 1996 09:14:09 +0100 Original-Received: from FIERCE-BAD-RABBIT.MIT.EDU by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA01217; Wed, 20 Mar 96 03:13:19 EST Original-Received: by fierce-bad-rabbit.MIT.EDU (5.57/4.7) id AA11397; Wed, 20 Mar 96 03:14:06 -0500 Original-To: Jason L Tibbitts III In-Reply-To: Jason L Tibbitts III's message of 20 Mar 1996 00:56:00 -0600 Original-Lines: 20 X-Mailer: September Gnus v0.51/Emacs 19.30 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:5618 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:5618 I'm surprised at all this talk about expiration being slow; I'm using nnml stored in that that lumbering behemoth filesystem, AFS. And I read my mail frequently throughout the day and get a fair amount of traffic, so it runs the expiry process much more often than necessary and frequently deletes mail. It takes only a few extra seconds between each group which seems reasonably efficient. It looks like maybe some specific backend or option is triggering some inefficient behaviour. I use gnus-total-exirable-newsgroups set to ^nnml:mail\. and I use nnml as my backend. I think dates are in the overview so nnmh might be much less efficient. The point movement in nnmbox/nnbabyl should be fine, better even if it sorted the article-ids numerically instead of alphabetically (as per my previous mail). Though it probably has to parse date headers for all the newsgroups then run through them all a second time to actually expire stuff, hmm that's sort of innefficient. greg