[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kdepim-users
Subject:    Re: [kdepim-users] kmail: what it's doing...
From:       Anne Wilson <cannewilson () tiscali ! co ! uk>
Date:       2007-04-06 18:46:02
Message-ID: 200704061946.09316.cannewilson () tiscali ! co ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Friday 06 April 2007, Roy J. Tellason wrote:
> On Thursday 05 April 2007 16:03, Anne Wilson wrote:
> > > The "limited machine resource" point was aimed at this.  I don't _want_
> > > this software to be using CPU cycles and doing disk activity when I've
> > > got a bunch of other stuff going on,  and taking resources away from
> > > other things,  I want to be able to do it manually and not have the
> > > software "decide" when it's going to do it -- this is a choice,  and
> > > one that should not have been taken away from me.
> >
> > I think the idea is that if it is done very frequently it requires very
> > few resources.  Doing it infrequently is a much bigger drain on
> > resources, and of course that mustn't happen while you are doing other
> > intensive work.
>
> Just so.
>
> > Unfortunately, doing it manually often means forgetting to do it at all.
>
> I don't see that as much of a problem.
>
> OTOH,  a bit earlier today I saw it "compacting" a folder here that
> contains only archived material -- one which _never_ gets any smaller.  

What exactly did you see?  I've never 'seen' any compaction.

> I 
> have a LOT of these on hand here,  and if that's what it's messing with
> then it's really wasting a lot more time than I thought.  Those folders
> need never be compacted _at all_,  and there seems to be no control over
> this.
>
> This wouldn't bother me so much if it weren't for the relatively sluggish
> response I get sometimes,  like switching to a different folder brings up
> the headers but it's a progression,  first the header of the message that
> ends up getting displayed (while the rest of the displayed list contains
> the header info from the folder I Just left,  for a bit),  and then only
> after a significant delay does the actual message display.  I don't
> remember things being this sluggish,  not at all.
>
Are these folders mbox?  If they are, there's the answer to your problem.  
Mbox gets progressively slower as the files grow.  That's the reason I 
changed to maildir.

> Another example is when I want to highlight some text,  say I want to do a
> search on it or whatever.  I can see from the status lights and the delay
> involved that the machine is actually hitting swap when I right-click in
> preparation to ctrl-C for copy.  WTH?
>
Again, I'm not sure what you mean by saying that you can see that it's hitting 
swap.  Perhaps you could elaborate?  If you are using mbox, remember that the 
whole file has to be read and re-written if you add or delete anything.  
That's slow if your folder has many messages.

> > > > The problems of missing messages appear to be the result of your
> > > > expiry settings.
> > >
> > > Those were only supposed to deal with _read_ messages,  not _unread_
> > > ones, though.  Apparently there's something in there that "decided"
> > > that some of the stuff was "too old" and just deleted them,  whether I
> > > wanted it to or not.  Didn't get around to reading them yet?  Too bad!
> >
> > I don't know what's doing that.l  It certainly doesn't do it here.  I
> > have folders with mail in that date from 2005 - folders without expiry
> > set, that is.  I never have unread mail for long, but if the problem
> > existed here I would expect to have seen it.
>
> Well,  that's the thing -- it was unread mail.  I lost my connectivity for
> a period of a few months,  and then I didn't have access to most of my
> computer gear,  just this laptop.  And I wasn't real happy to fire it up, 
> seeing unread mail in that last batch of stuff I'd been able to retrieve ,
> and then watch as the software wiped it out before my eyes before I had a
> chance to view most of it.
>
I can't see that we are going to get anywhere with this one - you have no 
error messages or anything else that would help us know what's happening.  
All I know is that it's not normal.  I've never heard of anyone else having 
that problem.

> > Maybe you are going to have to get a more technical answer, after all.
>
> Maybe I'm just going to have to switch to a different mail client,  and
> stop using kmail.

Your choice, but that will not help you to ever know what caused it.  It's not 
kmail's normal behaviour.  Something caused it.  How do you know that the 
same cause will not affect another application?  If it were me, I'd want to 
find the reason.

Anne

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
KDE PIM users mailing list
kdepim-users@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kdepim-users


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]