1 Return-Path: <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
\r
2 X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
3 Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
4 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
\r
5 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D45C40DBD7
\r
6 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:00:51 -0800 (PST)
\r
7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org
\r
11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5
\r
12 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
\r
13 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])
\r
14 by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
\r
15 with ESMTP id po4a0JJfcP+O for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
\r
16 Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:00:39 -0800 (PST)
\r
17 Received: from max.feld.cvut.cz (max.feld.cvut.cz [147.32.192.36])
\r
18 by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6165940DBC8
\r
19 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:00:39 -0800 (PST)
\r
20 Received: from localhost (unknown [192.168.200.4])
\r
21 by max.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403AE19F3344;
\r
22 Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:00:38 +0100 (CET)
\r
23 X-Virus-Scanned: IMAP AMAVIS
\r
24 Received: from max.feld.cvut.cz ([192.168.200.1])
\r
25 by localhost (styx.feld.cvut.cz [192.168.200.4]) (amavisd-new,
\r
27 with ESMTP id JUVZl2Z-XzoM; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:00:33 +0100 (CET)
\r
28 Received: from imap.feld.cvut.cz (imap.feld.cvut.cz [147.32.192.34])
\r
29 by max.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC6C19F3312;
\r
30 Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:00:33 +0100 (CET)
\r
31 Received: from steelpick.2x.cz (unknown [213.29.198.144])
\r
32 (Authenticated sender: sojkam1)
\r
33 by imap.feld.cvut.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 33DB9FA003;
\r
34 Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:00:33 +0100 (CET)
\r
35 Received: from wsh by steelpick.2x.cz with local (Exim 4.72)
\r
36 (envelope-from <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>)
\r
37 id 1PHtzM-0002x4-Th; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:00:32 +0100
\r
38 From: Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz>
\r
39 To: Darren McGuicken <mailing-notmuch@fernseed.info>,
\r
40 Matthieu Lemerre <racin@free.fr>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
41 Subject: Re: [PATCH] How to improve the mail handling workflow?
\r
42 In-Reply-To: <87hbflwkmk.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>
\r
43 References: <87fwv65zw1.fsf@free.fr> <87sjz6ft52.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>
\r
44 <87sjz5pxkp.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
\r
45 <87hbflwkmk.fsf@bookbinder.fernseed.info>
\r
46 User-Agent: Notmuch/0.5-11-g48b5e00 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.2.1
\r
47 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
\r
48 Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:00:32 +0100
\r
49 Message-ID: <87zktbow2n.fsf@steelpick.2x.cz>
\r
51 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
\r
52 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
53 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
\r
55 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
\r
56 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
\r
57 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
\r
58 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
\r
59 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>
\r
60 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
\r
61 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
\r
62 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
\r
63 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
\r
64 X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 08:00:51 -0000
\r
66 On Sat, 13 Nov 2010, Darren McGuicken wrote:
\r
67 > On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 07:05:58 +0100, Michal Sojka <sojkam1@fel.cvut.cz> wrote:
\r
68 > > I agree with you in that in many cases tags can be replaced by saved
\r
69 > > searches. Last time I did it, i.e. used saved searches to distinguish
\r
70 > > messages from different mailing lists, the result was that it took
\r
71 > > very long time (something like 5 seconds) to show notmuch-hello
\r
73 > Interesting, what Xapian backend are you using? I moved to chert after
\r
74 > id:"87ocl1lut1.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org" and my notmuch-hello with 15
\r
75 > saved searches appears in a couple of seconds when freshly loaded,
\r
76 > faster when switching back to it after use.
\r
78 I use chert as well.
\r
80 > That may well be slower than just tag searches but it's not yet at a
\r
81 > threshold where I notice it. How many searches had you saved?
\r
83 I had 45 (or so). I wanted two searches for every mailing list. One
\r
84 "tag:inbox and (...)" and the second only "...".
\r
86 > > Additionally, I compared the speed of command line searches for tags
\r
87 > > and for the whole email addresses and even without the bug mentioned
\r
88 > > above, the search for to: is usually slower than the search for tag:.
\r
90 > Very non-scientifically just using time and vm/drop_caches on my
\r
91 > netbook, having tagged all mail sent to the list address with 'notmuch',
\r
92 > I seem to get much the same performance:
\r
94 > $ time notmuch search tag:notmuch > /dev/null
\r
100 > $ time notmuch search to:notmuch > /dev/null
\r
106 > $ time notmuch search to:notmuch@notmuchmail.org > /dev/null
\r
112 My current numbers (with hot cache) are bellow.
\r
114 $ time notmuch count tag:notmuch
\r
116 0,00s user 0,00s system 72% cpu 0,011 total
\r
117 $ time notmuch count to:notmuch@notmuchmail.org
\r
119 0,03s user 0,00s system 89% cpu 0,036 total
\r
121 That is 36ms vs. 11ms. If these numbers are multiplied by 45 (or by 90
\r
122 with the bug in notmuch hello), this makes the difference.
\r
projects / notmuch-archives.git / blob