On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:04:12 +0000, Frederik Himpe wrote: > I cannot really imagine how another application can be still be > "considerably worse" than this.
Searching headers for a pattern in a high traffic group was extremely time consuming in Tin. After 15 minutes of my system being almost completely tied up with both cores pushing 100% usage, I would hit 'q', Tin would ask if I wanted to abort the search, I would say yes, but after a half hour, it still couldn't pull itself out. Opening a new group that Tin didn't yet have an overview file for was in some cases just impossible. I would let it work over night and wake to find it taking over two gigabytes of my 3 of ram. A few more hours and it would take more, plus several gigabytes of swap. Then the kernel would oom my X window system. I'm a stubborn person, but I just had to give up. > I just tried filtering for CFS in one > month of linux kernel mailing list, and I killed it again after several > minutes of 100% CPU time. Pan has become completely unusable for me now: > it was certainly not like that before, otherwise I would never used it > for months without noticing and complaining... Could it be a regression > in 0.132? It could be, I suppose, but the number of headers I keep around tends to grow over time, naturally increasing search times, so without doing actual tests, I couldn't say about this, one way or the other. -- Greg _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
