From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bob Rogers Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: 23.0.60; RMAIL reading of mail file Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 14:40:04 -0500 Message-ID: <18350.404.929683.328844@rgrjr.rgrjr.dyndns.org> References: <8724-Thu07Feb2008164605+0000-jpff@cs.bath.ac.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1202587628 18003 80.91.229.12 (9 Feb 2008 20:07:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 20:07:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org To: Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 09 21:07:30 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JNvyz-00034t-0C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 21:07:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JNvyW-00042y-32 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:07:00 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JNvyS-000419-HA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:56 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JNvyP-0003y4-KR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:55 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JNvyP-0003xv-DJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:53 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JNvyP-0003Sv-2H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mx10.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JNvyO-0004cw-R5 for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:52 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JNvyJ-0003Rt-JL for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:50 -0500 Original-Received: from c-98-216-94-251.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.216.94.251] helo=rgrjr.dyndns.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JNvyJ-0003Rh-9P for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:47 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 11068 invoked by uid 89); 9 Feb 2008 19:40:05 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO rgr.rgrjr.dyndns.org) (192.168.57.1) by home with SMTP; 9 Feb 2008 19:40:05 -0000 Original-Received: by rgr.rgrjr.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 1E4644B830; Sat, 9 Feb 2008 14:40:05 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <8724-Thu07Feb2008164605+0000-jpff@cs.bath.ac.uk> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 23.0.50.4 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Greylist: delayed 1601 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at monty-python; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 15:06:47 EST X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:88597 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:20967 Archived-At: From: Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 16:46:05 +0000 I have been performing further experiments on this question (reading my RMAIL file into latest CVS emacs). On a 2GHz AMD64x2 machine it took 118minutes of CPU, basically 100% of one processor for 2 hours to obey M-x rmail-mode after I had loaded the file with M-x find-file-literally. This seems in line with my belief that the algorithm being used is n^2, and for my 95Kb file is totally unacceptable . . . ==John ffitch I cannot reproduce this on my 1.8GHz i686 Athlon with 256M of RAM, using emacsen built from trunk today and on 27-Jan (i.e. both before and after the Unicode merge). I observe linear CPU-time growth between files of 127M and 254M (albeit artificially constructed ones), to a total of about 18sec and 34sec respectively. I wonder, how much RAM do you have on this system? -- Bob Rogers http://rgrjr.dyndns.org/