<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [PATCH] display search progress with $search_inc



Hi,

* Vincent Lefevre [06-11-14 02:15:36 +0100] wrote:
On 2006-11-13 15:27:02 +0000, Rocco Rutte wrote:
I don't think time-based is a good alternative to $search_inc. The reason is quite simple: when you have 52k messages then mutt needs to query the time 52k times. And if the search is trivial so that search/limit is done in <1 second, it will slow things down drastically.

I've tried here under Mac OS X, replacing the mutt_message by a call
to times in your patch, with $search_inc=1, and a limit on my 52k
mailbox takes a fraction of second. So, this is very fast, at least
*much* faster than calling mutt_message (and I haven't even tried
through a SSH connection). This is even faster than $search_inc=10
with mutt_message.

Okay, I didn't actually test it. But still I think it's not necessary to call time() on every single message we examine.

On the other hand: we now have $read_inc/$write_inc and $net_inc. The first two are used for reading messages and thus specify a message boundary when to update things. The latter is for network data and thus specifies a data limit.

And as search operates on messages, too, I think per message is okay.

A value of 10 still is just too low for fast machines like it is for $read_inc/$write_inc...

  bye, Rocco
--
:wq!