Hi Ted, >>>>> "Ted" == Ted Zlatanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ted> On 17 Mar 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I recently upgraded from Oort 0.24 to No 0.30 and my spam handling >> has become quite slow. Here is my situation: [...] >> This is quite slower with No 0.30 w.r.t. Oort 0.24 because, >> apparently, both mail.spam.temp and mail.spam.save are written to >> disk each time a single message is moved. With Oort 0.24 as far as >> I can understand both groups are written to disk only once. Ted> Alberto, Ted> thank you for the comments. Ted> Some people on the 'ding' mailing list (which is the main vehicle Ted> for Gnus development) have commented that nnfolder is much slower Ted> with CVS Emacs than with the older releases. Could this be part Ted> of the problem? I use xemacs 21.4.13 (and sometimes emacs 21.3), in Linux CentOs 4. My impression is that xemacs/emacs speed in dealing with nnfoldel files didn't change, but No Gnus 0.30 is slower than Oort Gnus 0.24 because it has a less efficient strategy in multiple message moving, with the nnfolder backend. I will look in the past messages of this group to get the coordinates one the 'ding' mailing list and will try to collaborate there. Ted> Also, is it possible for you to use the CVS version of Gnus, so Ted> we can debug this problem against the latest version of spam.el? That's OK, I will look how to get the CVS version. Thanks for the message, -- Alberto _______________________________________________ info-gnus-english mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-gnus-english
