Re: Performance anyway

On 2002.08.12 13:03 Ford Prefect wrote:
> Hi
> Ever tried to open an 130 MB mbox file with Balsa? Loading the file 
> is fast (some secs) but then some minutes high CPU load till it is 
> there.
> Why doesn't Balsa use some Indexing as Netscape does (the mbox file 
> is from netscape 4.x)?

Rules of Optimization:
Rule 1: Don't do it.
Rule 2 (for experts only): Don't do it yet.
- M.A. Jackson

"More computing sins are committed in the name of efficiency (without 
necessarily achieving it) than for any other single reason - including 
blind stupidity."
- W.A. Wulf

"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: 
premature optimization is the root of all evil."
- Donald Knuth

"The best is the enemy of the good."
- Voltaire [Counter]

I would rather spend my time on making the mailbox handling code more 
"correct" than faster in few cases (perhaps I do not happen to have too 
many 130MB mailboxes). What hurts me more is a lack of a flexible 
interface to adding new mailbox drivers that inefficiency of the ones 
we have now.

BTW, if you have many large messages, you might want to try maildir/mh 
mailbox format.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]