From exmh-workers-admin@redhat.com  Mon Aug 26 23:40:32 2002
Return-Path: <exmh-workers-admin@spamassassin.taint.org>
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EB0844155
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 18:40:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 26 Aug 2002 23:40:28 +0100 (IST)
Received: from listman.spamassassin.taint.org (listman.spamassassin.taint.org [66.187.233.211]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7QMdLZ12693 for
    <jm-exmh@jmason.org>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 23:39:22 +0100
Received: from listman.spamassassin.taint.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by
    listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40FD23FBDF; Mon, 26 Aug 2002
    18:39:29 -0400 (EDT)
Delivered-To: exmh-workers@listman.spamassassin.taint.org
Received: from int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org (int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org
    [172.16.52.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF8E40269
    for <exmh-workers@listman.redhat.com>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 18:34:59 -0400
    (EDT)
Received: (from mail@localhost) by int-mx1.corp.spamassassin.taint.org (8.11.6/8.11.6)
    id g7QMYtf01202 for exmh-workers@listman.redhat.com; Mon, 26 Aug 2002
    18:34:55 -0400
Received: from mx1.spamassassin.taint.org (mx1.spamassassin.taint.org [172.16.48.31]) by
    int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g7QMYtY01198 for
    <exmh-workers@redhat.com>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 18:34:55 -0400
Received: from milou.dyndns.org (h189n1fls22o974.telia.com
    [213.64.79.189]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id
    g7QMK1l18661 for <exmh-workers@redhat.com>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 18:20:01
    -0400
Received: by milou.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 0009A3F21;
    Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:34:48 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from tippex.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by
    milou.dyndns.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF7513F20 for
    <exmh-workers@redhat.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:34:48 +0200 (CEST)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5_20020826 01/15/2001 with nmh-1.0.4
To: exmh-workers@spamassassin.taint.org
Subject: Re: Exmh && speed
In-Reply-To: Message from Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu of
    "Mon, 26 Aug 2002 14:22:46 EDT."
    <200208261822.g7QIMk7P005756@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Anders Eriksson <aeriksson@fastmail.fm>
Message-Id: <20020826223448.0009A3F21@milou.dyndns.org>
X-Loop: exmh-workers@spamassassin.taint.org
Sender: exmh-workers-admin@spamassassin.taint.org
Errors-To: exmh-workers-admin@spamassassin.taint.org
X-Beenthere: exmh-workers@spamassassin.taint.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.1
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:exmh-workers-request@spamassassin.taint.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:exmh-workers@spamassassin.taint.org>
List-Subscribe: <https://listman.spamassassin.taint.org/mailman/listinfo/exmh-workers>,
    <mailto:exmh-workers-request@redhat.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Discussion list for EXMH developers <exmh-workers.spamassassin.taint.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://listman.spamassassin.taint.org/mailman/listinfo/exmh-workers>,
    <mailto:exmh-workers-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://listman.spamassassin.taint.org/mailman/private/exmh-workers/>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:34:43 +0200



cwg-dated-1030817858.a49b7e@DeepEddy.Com said:
> From:  Anders Eriksson <aeriksson@fastmail.fm>
> Date:  Mon, 26 Aug 2002 20:00:36 +0200 >
> 
> lately I've got the feeling that exmh is getting slower and slower. I 
> just decided to check that vs. reality, and yes, speed has left the 
> scene somewhere between the release of 2.5 and now.
> 
> I checked on a number of small messages in a big folder (~10000 
> msgs). The delay of the Next button has increased considerably:
> 
> 2.5-release: 350-450 msec
> latest cvs: 1000-12000 msec
> 
> Frankly I think this is getting close to non-acceptable since the 
> user settings hasn't changed.
> 
> Anybody have any ideas where performance disappeared?
> Most likely in the added overhead of managing more sequences.
> I'm sure it can be tuned a bunch, but as I'm leaving for a vacation on
> Friday,  and have plenty of "real work" to do, I won't be able to do
> much until I get  back.

> I *will* look at all this when I get back, but if you want to check
> into  what's slow and fix things while I'm gone, my feelings won't be
> hurt.

> Chris 

Just one more info. I measured the time spent wrapping the stuff in 
Ftoc_Next with time {} so the data is for real. One difference 
between mine and Valdis' setup (judging from his trace) is that I use 
the address book. I've been doing that for ages so that can't be the 
problem.

Is there a way to get the log to print time with higher granularity?

/A






_______________________________________________
Exmh-workers mailing list
Exmh-workers@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-workers

