From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "T.V Raman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: NNSelect Failing Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:08:59 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20201217164127.6813FC20D1D@raman-glaptop.localdomain> <87wnxgs73v.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87ft44rvms.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <24539.52000.839057.766130@retriever.mtv.corp.google.com> <87blesrs7h.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <874kkjixqi.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <874kkjgga2.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87lfduswza.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <874kkiirvs.fsf@ust.hk> <87o8iqh7c6.fsf@ust.hk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb18030 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39085"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrew Cohen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 19 16:09:40 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kqdrX-000A4i-VA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 16:09:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58500 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqdrX-0001Bb-19 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 10:09:39 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58380) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqdqz-0000mq-MX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 10:09:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]:46962) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kqdqx-0006X8-SI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 10:09:05 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id v3so3004224plz.13 for ; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:09:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3KvX9CV5Vk/ZuYV14t41aQqYUb39hkoku7PYY7AGpLs=; b=u2mMv4ZE3FGnSNg7OtfGKjDWqDLVDNYbbQWGmJ0xmi6K09IQSYr+HrCdqN9R3GRf9L 95BsjQllt4Adk4mY/wqgJyzLyRWLnV6Fk4EItpr1SYLTvn1KWBb6fRcvZGmqjODzy7UG pMPtsbJhQZ1Wyn/+M12LmdyArvIm+j7Q7zZUI72zxbHOMDkxzLDw1diiU7ywY7ch+2H/ M8VjRRKGO7J72ozbcHwW2RRWS19Vx/7XIe308ScShbWoCAvgGx456lFwTu3hD8BnP1sd Vj00H85Uhbji6JdDGaTPS85dfj2lyFznczP+4jVyDqbQRrDlSeHw42YpijbWw3Av5LCR mOrA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3KvX9CV5Vk/ZuYV14t41aQqYUb39hkoku7PYY7AGpLs=; b=ZnhRpjl7Rjktg8rJhFfrOcqQteD2nmDagih5xOIUTjmLAdkfM9RskfHtdrd4L8BJrC +Y1FQ4qpvcxgUXUe8MyobjQpC4TwKR83mkxYbyRxkhQ8QKXkJIx13AK0LCiBvEt6JMI7 QviX0jPDGjaaVZZFsv+NUfuKWYJNxb9PHixJgqTuMZnrY2viaJrE+QNGGwYASDg5fkdY NMg9immk9ZUs5XQmHJhyTBHhHNlNSEVJGD3Yn3nw24gBGCdtvw2JtzorOtY2j3WzHdTG Qj8nbL+j+tsblEvYRGXu39P4UvdqnZjAeVOyeY4BiZZ1wehkIwYzLkQGotC02jsKxFnZ P1YQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531qc9YGJp2GmhApoqtQXW5UFDjgXJNdBFsEbMzHBbNzI1vtZWbW 358X1eOl4UUw3F9iHgi8RiVgdJcCYvaxiCoS X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw+5A1p27Eg38mYctl0kAbwjyS7OVtKHK3vq2YXLYK687M0x0pozRSRiN6oK32pVe6raU16kw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:1c09:: with SMTP id s9mr9340790pjs.83.1608390541511; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:09:01 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from raman-glaptop.localdomain (c-24-4-174-65.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.4.174.65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 198sm11794976pfw.29.2020.12.19.07.09.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:09:00 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by raman-glaptop.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 13930) id BD3C3C21A3C; Sat, 19 Dec 2020 07:08:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87o8iqh7c6.fsf@ust.hk> (Andrew Cohen's message of "Sat, 19 Dec 2020 10:12:41 +0800") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d; envelope-from=raman@google.com; helo=mail-pl1-x62d.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -175 X-Spam_score: -17.6 X-Spam_bar: ----------------- X-Spam_report: (-17.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:261249 Archived-At: Andrew Cohen writes: This latency could well be gmail specific --- perhaps nnselect is doing something in "catchup" that is heavy-weight with respect to gmail/imap integration (note: I'm just fishing here). >>>>>> "TVR" =3D=3D T V Raman writes: > > TVR> Andrew Cohen writes: I first noticed it after > TVR> search broke for me and was restored. > > OK, going back through your messages it appears that this was Nov 7, and > you were pretty clearly using the nnselect backend prior to that. This > would tend to point the finger at gnus-search. > > But I'm kind of stumped how it could be gnus-search, since it should by > completely out of the loop once the list of articles is generated. This > suggests that something else (neither nnselect or gnus-search) changed > coincidentally around the same time. I don't see anything obvious in the > git logs from around this time.=20 > > I wish I could reproduce it. Just as a benchmark I do a search with an > imap group with about 20,000 messages that returns 4000 search hits. It > takes well under 1s from hitting "q" to finishing back at the group > buffer. (I haven't done better timing since I am assuming your observed > latency is more than this).=20 > > Some questions: > > The symptoms are: you enter a search group, do whatever, hit "q" to > exit, and it just takes awhile before you are back in the group buffer?=20 > > I assume this is with an ephemeral search group? (If it is a permanent > group things might be different). > > Do you use the registry? If so does turning it off eliminate the latency? > > > > > --=20 Thanks, --Raman =817=A94 Id: kg:/m/0285kf1 =950=DC8