--- /dev/null
+Return-Path: <astreib@indiana.edu>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B628B431FB6\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:52:07 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.699\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+ tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]\r
+ autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+ by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+ with ESMTP id 6f3hUFrpzsvf for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+ Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:51:58 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Greylist: delayed 585 seconds by postgrey-1.32 at olra;\r
+ Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:51:58 PDT\r
+Received: from hartman.uits.indiana.edu (belushi.uits.indiana.edu\r
+ [129.79.1.188])\r
+ by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDDC3431FAF\r
+ for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 05:51:58 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,884,1389762000"; d="scan'208";a="130292136"\r
+Received: from mssg-relay.indiana.edu ([129.79.1.73])\r
+ by irpt-internal-relay.indiana.edu with ESMTP;\r
+ 18 Apr 2014 08:42:11 -0400\r
+Received: from hartman.uits.indiana.edu (hartman.uits.indiana.edu\r
+ [129.79.1.194])\r
+ by mssg-relay.indiana.edu (8.14.7/8.14.4/IU Messaging Team) with ESMTP\r
+ id s3ICgBIx026919; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 08:42:11 -0400\r
+X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,884,1389762000"; d="scan'208";a="130597179"\r
+Received: from candy.uits.indiana.edu (HELO mail-relay.iu.edu)\r
+ ([129.79.1.201]) by irpt-internal-relay.indiana.edu with ESMTP; 18 Apr 2014\r
+ 08:42:11 -0400\r
+Received: from viking (156-56-93-99.dhcp-bl.indiana.edu [156.56.93.99])\r
+ (authenticated bits=0)\r
+ by mail-relay.iu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.4/IU Messaging Team Submission) with\r
+ ESMTP id s3ICg9Cx015585\r
+ (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256\r
+ verify=NO); Fri, 18 Apr 2014 08:42:10 -0400\r
+Received: from localhost (1000@localhost [local]);\r
+ by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 8afe03ff;\r
+ Fri, 18 Apr 2014 08:42:09 -0400 (EDT)\r
+From: Allan Streib <astreib@indiana.edu>\r
+To: David Mazieres expires 2014-07-16 PDT\r
+ <mazieres-tnzx3thbrpqukbfpgvb2huwbe2@temporary-address.scs.stanford.edu>\r
+Subject: Re: notmuch, OpenBSD issues\r
+In-Reply-To: <878ur37b5l.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu>\r
+References: <871twvokwm.fsf@viking.indiana.edu>\r
+ <877g6ny3iw.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>\r
+ <878ur37b5l.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.17+186~g69867c3 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1\r
+ (x86_64-unknown-openbsd)\r
+Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 08:42:09 -0400\r
+Message-ID: <87lhv27qse.fsf@indiana.edu>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 01:04:39 -0700\r
+Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+ <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+ <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 12:52:08 -0000\r
+\r
+David Mazieres <dm-list-email-notmuch@scs.stanford.edu> writes:\r
+\r
+> I'm using notmuch 0.17 on openbsd (from the ports tree). My problem is\r
+> that notmuch new is just unbearably slow. I don't know if it's because\r
+> I'm running the 32-bit (i386) mode or what, but it takes over one second\r
+> per mail message. E.g., this is typical of what I see when checking for\r
+> new mail:\r
+>\r
+> Processed 18 total files in 20s (0 files/sec.).\r
+> Added 5 new messages to the database.\r
+>\r
+> Linux is 10 times faster. Have you seen any similar performance issues?\r
+\r
+I didn't realize there was a port. I don't see it in my tree (amd64,\r
+recent 5.5-current). I've been building from the git repo.\r
+\r
+Anyway, yes I have seen similar on an older Mac OS X install I have at\r
+home on a G4 PowerBook. I haven't had "unbearably" slow performance on\r
+my amd64 OpenBSD installation, but there is sometimes a noticable lag.\r
+\r
+I wonder if it would help to enable softupdates on the partition where\r
+your database lives? http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq14.html#SoftUpdates\r
+\r
+Allan\r
+\r
+\r
+\r