From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dave Love Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: IMAP and Exchange 2007 - imap-fetch-safe Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:59:09 +0000 Message-ID: <87zlhpbqea.fsf@liv.ac.uk> References: <87iqphil5p.fsf@liv.ac.uk> <87ocz3n8d4.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <87iqpa99wy.fsf@liv.ac.uk> <87wsde7t5j.fsf_-_@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <86mye95p27.fsf@lifelogs.com> <878wpt48qj.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <86d4eyvryx.fsf@lifelogs.com> <878wplcxws.fsf@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> <87k58za3q8.fsf@liv.ac.uk> <87k58zm99o.fsf_-_@marauder.physik.uni-ulm.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1232225907 2597 80.91.229.12 (17 Jan 2009 20:58:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:58:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Simon Josefsson , "ding@gnus.org" , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Bjorn Solberg Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 17 21:59:37 2009 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 1LOIGU-0005N5-Hi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:59:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44338 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LOIFD-0006W4-HB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:58:15 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LOIF6-0006SJ-Ur for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:58:08 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LOIF5-0006Pr-Ai for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:58:08 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54734 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LOIF5-0006Pc-27 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:58:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mxc.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.100.103]:42570) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LOIF4-0003bu-Ik for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 15:58:06 -0500 Original-Received: from mailhubb.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.100.37]) by mxc.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1LOIF4-0000H1-3f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:58:06 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=mailhubb.liv.ac.uk) by mailhubb.liv.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1LOIF4-00024x-1Z; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:58:06 +0000 Original-Received: from pc102091.liv.ac.uk ([138.253.102.91] helo=albion) by mailhubb.liv.ac.uk with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1LOIF3-00024u-RW; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:58:05 +0000 Original-Received: from dlove by albion with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LOIG5-0007Kf-VP; Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:59:09 +0000 X-Draft-From: ("nnimap+imap.liv.ac.uk:Misc" 3442) In-Reply-To: (Bjorn Solberg's message of "Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:28:56 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/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:107942 gmane.emacs.gnus.general:68174 Archived-At: Bjorn Solberg writes: > and everything still works fine, albeit slow. Fetching new mail and > using nnimap-split-inbox '("INBOX") and nnimap-split-rule processes > about 2s/header or 1/2 header/sec. It's not obviously slow for me (on a fast machine, these days), but I haven't tried to time it against, say, Evolution. I think there is too much consing going on, but not necessarily in the IMAP code. M-x elp-instrument-package should reveal any bottleneck.