On 2015-04-24 09:35:29 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > Anyway remember that the main slowness I have is when I retag messages. > I could improve my script to cache the message-id -> filename mapping, > which would make it much faster. But what I like to understand is why > my current script is so much slower than Mutt (when the mailbox is not > in the cache), while both are reading about the same data. I'll have > to do some tests with slight changes in my script to see if this makes > a difference. Hmm... something I've just thought about is to look at > the cache size in both cases: > 1. Drop the caches. Open the mailbox with Mutt. > 2. Drop the caches. Use my script.
I think I've found the reason. See the new thread: Subject: the correct way to read a big directory? Mutt? -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150424135338.ga6...@ypig.lip.ens-lyon.fr
