From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Is it just me, or did 21.3.50 get a whole lot slower?
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:33:41 -0600 (MDT)
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <200206201433.g5KEXfL18550@aztec.santafe.edu>
References: <87adpxob2n.fsf@alice.dynodns.net>
	<ap3lm9hh96g.fsf@y.glue.umd.edu>
	<200206152147.g5FLlQA10959@aztec.santafe.edu>
	<ap3bsabgjc1.fsf@z.glue.umd.edu>
	<200206171630.g5HGUr413822@aztec.santafe.edu> <ap31yb4a6i4.fsf@z.glue.umd.edu>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1024583792 15407 127.0.0.1 (20 Jun 2002 14:36:32 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 14:36:32 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Return-path: <emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
	id 17L332-00040O-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 16:36:32 +0200
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 17L3Uk-0007vp-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 17:05:10 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 17L32i-0003CQ-00; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 10:36:12 -0400
Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 17L30I-0002ig-00; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 10:33:42 -0400
Original-Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49])
	by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g5KEXfC29402;
	Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:33:41 -0600 (MDT)
Original-Received: (from rms@localhost)
	by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g5KEXfL18550;
	Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:33:41 -0600 (MDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec using -f
Original-To: deego@glue.umd.edu
In-Reply-To: <ap31yb4a6i4.fsf@z.glue.umd.edu> (deego@glue.umd.edu)
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:5005
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5005

    it seems that when things get slow, everything gets slow.. it seems to
    take emacs a minute to even recognize a C-n ... 

How strange.  Well, it should be easy to investigate this.  Run Emacs
under GDB, and when it gets slow, stop it with C-z a few times and run
`backtrace' and `xbacktrace' each time.  After a few times, you will
see where Emacs is spending its time.