nnimap is very slow compared to netscape

nnimap is very slow compared to netscape

[Uwe Brauer]

Hello

When accessing my INBOX (size 1500 message ~5M) via nnimap it is 
at least 10 times slower than Netscape, is there any variable I can
change?

Thanks

Uwe Brauer 

Re: nnimap is very slow compared to netscape

[those who know me have no need of my name]

in gnu.emacs.gnus i read:
>Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> writes:
>> Uwe Brauer <oub@sunma2.mat.ucm.es> writes:

>> > When accessing my INBOX (size 1500 message ~5M) via nnimap it is at
>> >least 10 times slower than Netscape, is there any variable I can
>> >change?
>> 
>> More recent Gnus should be faster.

but still unusable on servers that don't use monotonically increasing uid's.

>I am using 5.8.8

i think simon was referring to oort, which is the bleeding edge of gnus,
i.e., the development version which you can obtain from
<http://www.gnus.org/distribution.html> -- the tarball is oort 0.06,
bleading edge is via cvs, instructions on the same page.

-- 
bringing you boring signatures for 17 years

Re: nnimap is very slow compared to netscape

[Shao Zhang]

On [09 Jul 2002 00:50:25 +0000], Sherilyn <sherilyn@suespammers.org> wrote:
> Shao Zhang <shaoz@activesky.com> writes:
>
>> On [08 Jul 2002 07:13:41 GMT], those who know me have no need of
>> my name <not-a-real-address@usa.net> wrote:
>> > but still unusable on servers that don't use monotonically increasing uid's.
>> 
>> Is there anyway to fix this? This is my biggest problem with gnus at the
>> moment.
>
> A good workaround until this is fixed would be to use fetchmail to put
> emails into the local spool file where Gnus can fold, spindle and mutilate
> them to the point where they are readable.

I would not call it a workaround. If using fetchmail, then nnimap is not
needed at all.

Regards,

Shao.