From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Nic Ferrier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: hidden buffers for async Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:26:19 +0100 Message-ID: <874qc4tzbo.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> References: <6dbd4d0005060619227dd41364@mail.gmail.com> <87vf4oaft8.fsf@zemdatav.stor.no-ip.org> <87vf4oaao5.fsf@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> <87ll5ka5j7.fsf@zemdatav.stor.no-ip.org> <87is0oa35h.fsf_-_@kanga.tapsellferrier.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1118522158 13124 80.91.229.2 (11 Jun 2005 20:35:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:35:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 11 22:35:48 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DhChZ-0005aO-DN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 22:35:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DhCm1-0005JA-5i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:40:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DhCks-0004jf-3L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:38:58 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DhCkm-0004fm-SV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:38:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DhCkl-0004a5-IB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:38:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [80.168.156.78] (helo=owls-tree.tapsellferrier.co.uk) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA:16) (Exim 4.34) id 1DhCeP-0007j9-AM; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:32:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [80.168.156.68] (helo=kanga) by owls-tree.tapsellferrier.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1DhCY8-0004re-17; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:25:48 +0100 Original-Received: from nferrier by kanga with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DhCYd-0004Cp-Tg; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:26:19 +0100 Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Fri, 10 Jun 2005 18:37:39 -0400") 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:38593 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:38593 Richard Stallman writes: > But IMAP can be asked to download lots of files at once and will be > chunking them all. So I wanted to have lots of chunk buffers, one for > each file transfer. When the files are downloaded they can be put > straight into the correct mode for displaying the file. > > So there might be 10 or 20 (or 1000) buffers all recieving chunks of > files from IMAP. > > Creating that many buffers might cause various sorts of overload > for Emacs. Can't you use one buffer for all the information, > and sort it out at the end? The number of buffers would be 1:1 with the number of files being downloaded. Aggregating the data is the problem I was trying to avoid. Because the downloads all finish at different times it makes sorting the data difficult. I agree that downloading a lot of files will be silly. Perhaps I will set up a pool of 20 or so buffers for downloads and block or error when the pool is exhausted. Would that be a good idea? Nic