So, what happened to these benchmarks?
cu
AW
--
[...] If you don't want to be restricted, don't agree to it. If you are
coerced, comply as much as you must to protect yourself, just don't support
it. Noone can free you but yourself. (crag, on Debian Planet)
Arne Wichmann (a...@linux.de)
signat
tag 585559 -moreinfo unreproducible
tag 585559 +pending
thanks
We need to find a solution for this, I will run some benchmarks this
weekend and see when and where this is reproducible. At that point I
will be able to take a better decision with the proper data.
Cheers
Antonio
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
tag 585559 +unreproducible moreinfo
thanks
Hi,
please provide the info requested by Christoph when you get a chance.
anyway 1.5.20-9, which is being shipped with squeeze, is not using
libtokyocabinet as far as I'm aware of.
Cheers
Antonio
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@
tags 585559 unreproducible
thanks
Re: Jon 2010-06-11 <20100611171553.23394.61340.report...@nobel.vault24.org>
> The only conclusion I can draw from this is that the hcache backend is
> mostly irrelevant to IMAP performance. Both are far superior to no
> caching and the performance difference betwe
Package: mutt
Version: 1.5.20-8
Severity: normal
There is no way in hell this should actually be true, but it is. I ran
an actual benchmark to prove it. Maybe there is a bug in the current
SID version of TC, maybe mutt isn't using it in an optimal manner, I
don't know. But for the current way mu
5 matches
Mail list logo
