Ok Thanks.
On 2017-10-25 20:48, David Woodfall wrote:
Yes I have shell access. I have tried just setting mutt without imap
to use maildir, but It only sees my Inbox and no other folders.
Perhaps there's a way of doing it but I haven't managed yet.
Sync the store to your local box by other me
On 2017-10-25 20:48, David Woodfall wrote:
> Yes I have shell access. I have tried just setting mutt without imap
> to use maildir, but It only sees my Inbox and no other folders.
> Perhaps there's a way of doing it but I haven't managed yet.
Sync the store to your local box by other means (see b
No unusual headers. But I tried the options on that webpage and it
seems to have improved. Thanks.
On Di, 24 Okt 2017, David Woodfall wrote:
I've been using mutt a fair while now. Lately I've been using it with
imap and find that it can take a while to read headers.
Are there any tricks to s
On 17-10-25 09:41:23, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> Also you might want to check this article:
> http://www.codeblueprint.co.uk/2016/12/19/a-kernel-devs-approach-to-improving.html
Nice, thanks for sharing!
Cheers,
Georg
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Yes I have shell access. I have tried just setting mutt without imap
to use maildir, but It only sees my Inbox and no other folders.
Perhaps there's a way of doing it but I haven't managed yet.
On 2017-10-24 18:43, David Woodfall wrote:
I've been using mutt a fair while now. Lately I've been u
On Di, 24 Okt 2017, David Woodfall wrote:
> I've been using mutt a fair while now. Lately I've been using it with
> imap and find that it can take a while to read headers.
>
> Are there any tricks to speeding up imap?
>
> I do have a header cache, but it still takes some time opening a
> folder
On 2017-10-24 18:43, David Woodfall wrote:
> I've been using mutt a fair while now. Lately I've been using it with
> imap and find that it can take a while to read headers.
>
> Are there any tricks to speeding up imap?
Is IMAP a hard requirement? Do you have shell access to the server?
--
Ple
lder with a 1000+ or so messages.
> > >
> > > Any tips?
> >
> > Switching to `lmdb` backend made a significant speed upgrade difference for
> > me.
ader cache, but it still takes some time opening a
folder with a 1000+ or so messages.
Any tips?
Switching to `lmdb` backend made a significant speed upgrade difference for me.
che, but it still takes some time opening a
> folder with a 1000+ or so messages.
>
> Any tips?
Switching to `lmdb` backend made a significant speed upgrade difference for me.
I've been using mutt a fair while now. Lately I've been using it with
imap and find that it can take a while to read headers.
Are there any tricks to speeding up imap?
I do have a header cache, but it still takes some time opening a
folder with a 1000+ or so messages.
Any tips?
TIA
On śro, maj 08, 2013 at 09:24:12 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> message-hook . 'uncolor body "(http|https|ftp)://"''
> message-hook "~z 1-16384" 'color body color163 default
> "(http|https|ftp)://"'
Tested, and it works great (well, there is a typo in first line - '' at
the and, and should b
hing :)
> | Is there any way to speed up such coloring?
> Regexp efficiency is important. If you're actually using more complex
> regexps we should see them. Your small regexp above looks pretty
> good though.
It works just the same with simplest possible regexps (http://), i
rite
quite expensive regexps.
| Strace shows that the time is not spent in any syscall, so I guess it's
| internal processing.
You should be able to see mutt show up in top; that would be more
obviously cpu bound. Just for reference.
| Is there any way to speed up such coloring?
Regexp efficiency i
tains many urls (~ 900).
And in this case - displaying such mail takes long time (6-8 seconds).
Strace shows that the time is not spent in any syscall, so I guess it's
internal processing.
Is there any way to speed up such coloring?
Or, perhaps - make color rule work only for messages sm
Just wanted to share that I sent an inquiry to this post months ago
because the refreshing of my folders (50k emails, aprox) was very slow
due to the encryptation of my home folder.
Yesterday I decided to move my folders to a new EXT4 partition (with
"noatime,data=writeback,barrier=0,nobh,errors=re
On Nov 17, 2010 at 02:27 PM +0100, Christian Ebert wrote:
Shot in the dark: Especially under MacOS 10.4 I sometimes
improved things by:
$ tar cjf slow-maildir.tar.bz2 slow-maildir
$ mv slow-maildir slow-maildir-bak
$ tar xjf slow-maildir.tar.bz2
I'll give it a try. But I really did see a huge
* Tim Gray on Monday, November 15, 2010 at 15:40:45 -0500
> On Nov 08, 2010 at 12:49 AM +, Christian Ebert wrote:
>> Maybe you have to rebuild the databases now that you're using
>> iconv. FWIW, for me the combination with tokyocabinet is
>> lightning fast, but I'm still on a pure 32bit MacOS 1
On Nov 08, 2010 at 12:49 AM +, Christian Ebert wrote:
Maybe you have to rebuild the databases now that you're using
iconv. FWIW, for me the combination with tokyocabinet is
lightning fast, but I'm still on a pure 32bit MacOS 10.5.8. A
threaded mailbox with over 75000 messages opens in about 2
header caching, things were slow. I
> also stated I had upgraded tokyo cabinet and I noticed a huge speed
> increase in the initial read of a mailbox when I opened it. What I
> didn't realize at the time was that I had also rebuilt mutt with the
> iconv error at the same
and I noticed a huge speed increase in
the initial read of a mailbox when I opened it. What I didn't realize at
the time was that I had also rebuilt mutt with the iconv error at the same
time, so mutt wasn't using iconv.
Now that I've fixed mutt+iconv, I see I am back to m
Thus spake Rocco Rutte [05/21/08 @ 09.18.56 +0200]:
>
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Thus spake Rocco Rutte [05/15/08 @ 16.16.10 +0200]:
>
>>> http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/2978
>
>> I just downloaded the source and built. I don't use macports at all.
>> BerkeleyDB compiles flawlessly on Pa
Hi,
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thus spake Rocco Rutte [05/15/08 @ 16.16.10 +0200]:
http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/2978
I just downloaded the source and built. I don't use macports at all.
BerkeleyDB compiles flawlessly on Panther and Tiger for me.
Good, thanks for the feedback.
Ro
Thus spake Rocco Rutte [05/15/08 @ 16.16.10 +0200]:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> FWIW: I built using the BerkeleyDB libraries, since the other choices
>> refuse to work with OSX. (Actually, I finally got mutt to build with gdb,
>> but mutt behaved *really* weird with screen-drawing, so gdb is
Hi,
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW: I built using the BerkeleyDB libraries, since the other choices
refuse to work with OSX. (Actually, I finally got mutt to build with
gdb, but mutt behaved *really* weird with screen-drawing, so gdb is a
no-go on OSX).
How do you do that exactly? qdbm an
DNS issues indeed. My router was trying some black magic with DNS
relaying, so I turned it off and explicitly added my DNS servers.
Works like a charm now. Thanks !
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:54 PM, Dylan Stamat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey Rocco, thanks for the response. Here is the output
Hey Rocco, thanks for the response. Here is the output for both
imap and smtp:
host -v smtp.gmail.com
=
Trying "smtp.gmail.com"
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 51892
;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; Q
Hi,
* Dylan Stamat wrote:
I'm on a fresh install of OSX (Leopard), and did a macport install of
mutt-devel,
(see bottom of email for config opts). I had no issues on my OpenBSD machine,
but in moving my .muttrc over to this new machine, there are the
following problems.
1) When sending an
I'm on a fresh install of OSX (Leopard), and did a macport install of
mutt-devel,
(see bottom of email for config opts). I had no issues on my OpenBSD machine,
but in moving my .muttrc over to this new machine, there are the
following problems.
1) When sending an email, it hangs for a while (pro
[...]
> That's why they recently added $time_inc (it's not in a released
> version of mutt yet; just in the current development tree). Here's the
> description from the development manual:
Sweet. My INBOX opens nearly instantaneously now. And I thought that
it's the hcache being slow.
Thank yo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday, May 10 at 06:07 PM, quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> 1.5.17 with header caching enabled. I've got read_inc and write_inc
> set to 1000. Nevertheless, I've noticed that the process of
> evaluating the cache (when I switch into a big folder) i
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Saturday, May 10, 2008 at 18:07:04 -0400
> 1.5.17 with header caching enabled. I've got read_inc and
> write_inc set to 1000. Nevertheless, I've noticed that the
> process of evaluating the cache (when I switch into a big
> folder) is significantly slower when I use Termina
nificantly slower when I use Terminal.app than if I use xterm/rxvt
> over Apple's X11.
I run Mutt 1.5.17 via Terminal.app (on Leopard) with no such speed
issues. I installed via macports.
--
Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello,
1.5.17 with header caching enabled. I've got read_inc and write_inc set to
1000. Nevertheless, I've noticed that the process of evaluating the cache
(when I switch into a big folder) is significantly slower when I use
Terminal.app than if I use xterm/rxvt over Apple's X11.
This is puz
I was wondering if there are any current plans to make Mutt's
implementation of IMAP more speedy?
I love Mutt and would like to push it to take its (rightful!) place as
the corporate standard console-based mail reader. Trouble is that
IMAP is very big 'round these parts and Mutt's IMAP reading i
So sprach »Thomas Roessler« am 2001-08-23 um 10:45:25 +0200 :
> On 2001-08-22 17:01:40 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
[ mutt 1.3.19i ]
> >MUCH longer, to be "exact", it took about 2 minutes 30 seconds.
>
> Try a newer version. Someone has contributed a patch which improves
> mutt's threading algo
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 sys
On 2001-08-22 17:01:40 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>Also the load when opening the Maildir is WAY higher compared to
>the mbox file. Load when opening the mbox is about 2, Maildir is
>about 6. Okay, I've got setiathome running, so one may substract 1
>(? right?).
Ouch. PLEASE make sure th
So sprach »Thomas Roessler« am 2001-08-22 um 14:04:14 +0200 :
> Please perform the timing experiment with both mutt and Evolution
> several times, without doing much in between.
Timing sheet:
Mailer| Action | Time
--+-+--
On 2001-08-22 13:50:42 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>No, I did not. But in Evolution it's also very fast the very
>first time a Maildir is opened.
Right after you read it with mutt? I'm not talking about mutt
caches, but about operating system caches.
Please perform the timing experiment w
So sprach »Thomas Roessler« am 2001-08-22 um 10:23:05 +0200 :
> Did you do the mutt test several times, so kernel caches could kick
> in?
No, I did not. But in Evolution it's also very fast the very first time
a Maildir is opened.
Alexander Skwar
--
How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (germ
On 2001-08-21 23:02:13 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>While on the topic of Maildir. I also just recently checked out
>Maildir support in mutt 1.3.19i again. And, well, I'm not at all
>impressed :( To test, I've converted a 50 MB mbox with ~5000
>messages to Maildir. Opening the mbox in mutt
So sprach »Fernan Aguero« am 2001-08-21 um 14:57:33 -0300 :
> folders (I'm using maildir for all of my mailboxes).
While on the topic of Maildir. I also just recently checked out Maildir
support in mutt 1.3.19i again. And, well, I'm not at all impressed :(
To test, I've converted a 50 MB mbox w
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 03:28:03PM -0600, Troy Heber ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
said:
> Thanks for the suggestion, but I complete disabled all of my autoviews (I never
> had any for this MIME type anyway) and that did not resolve the problem.
>
> Any other suggestions?
Do you have complicated regular
On 2001-06-15 12:31:30 -0600, Troy Heber wrote:
>If I select the text portion of the message and press enter it
>comes up instantly. However, when I select the message and press
>enter from the main inbox (I think it's called the pager or the
>inbox) it takes 4 minutes 28 seconds! If I press Q
Thanks for the suggestion, but I complete disabled all of my autoviews (I never
had any for this MIME type anyway) and that did not resolve the problem.
Any other suggestions?
Thanks,
Troy
On 06/15/01, Hanif Ladha wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 12:31:30PM -0600, Troy Heber wrote:
> > I'm
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 12:31:30PM -0600, Troy Heber wrote:
> I'm running mutt 1.2.5i and I am experiencing a very strange problem.
> When I attempt to read messages from certain senders it takes minutes to
> display the message. For example if I press v on the message to see the
> attachments it
I'm running mutt 1.2.5i and I am experiencing a very strange problem.
When I attempt to read messages from certain senders it takes minutes to
display the message. For example if I press v on the message to see the
attachments it comes up instantly. These are the attachments on one such
message:
Hi,
I got several imap folders with 1000+ emails in each. Everytime I open a
folder it takes awfully long until all headers are fetched. How do I
have to configure mutt so that it saves headers or even entire emails
locally and then only kind of syncs these local folders with the imap
folders
49 matches
Mail list logo
