Re: [Evolution] Evo memory use

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2 infradead org>]

On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 16:06, Dan Winship wrote:
> > If the server can sort the mail for you (or thread -- that's just a
> > special case of sorting), then it means you don't have to have headers
> > of all the mail in the folder before you can display anything. You can
> > dramatically reduce network load, and improve responsiveness
>
> Well, you still need to download all of the headers that you're going to
> *display*. Meaning it's still O(n) on the size of your mailbox, just
> with a different constant.

Er. the number of headers you're going to display is O(n) of the size of
the index window, not the size of the mailbox. 

That's about ten messages, not the 3000-odd in the mailbox I may be
looking at.

> > Server-side _search_ even more so, of course.
>
> We already do that for body searches. 

Good.

> (We don't do it for header searches since it would be silly since 
> we have all of the header information cached locally.)

If I want to look at a handful of unread messages in a folder of
3000-odd messages, and Evolution tries to download _all_ the headers
before showing me the few new messages I actually want to see, that's
when I run killev and fire up pine instead :)

-- 
dwmw2