On 23.08.2001 10:45:25 Thomas Roessler wrote:
> Ouch. PLEASE make sure that (1) swapping isn't necessary, (2) your
> CPU is mostly idle when you do measurements, (3) mutt (or, for that
> matter, evolution) is the only process which competes for disk
> access.
Yes, I do know this. But, the system wasn't really busy, and those huge
differences which I found cannot be due to some other process running. Maybe if
I had tested it only once or twice - but I didn't. It was constantly in same
area like I listed.
> That's interesting - seems to translate to less disk accesses per
> unit time, which could mean that evolution is a bit slower at
> opening maildir folders.
Yes, that's right, and yes, Evolution is slower at the very first time.
> Now, such a cache will have to introduce explicit locking with
> maildir folders. But the entire point with this folder format is
Yep, I don't understand this either.
> Try a newer version. Someone has contributed a patch which improves
> mutt's threading algorithm to O( n log n ); it is in mutt-1.3.21.
I will! Thanks!
