On 2014-08-21 14:33, Anton Aylward wrote:
On 08/20/2014 10:13 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
now its acting as a support for my laserjet printer). Slow machine? yes. Single core so no parallelism such as Carlos talks of? Yes.
You can parallelize spamassassin in a single core machine when the issue is waiting for the online tests to get an answer from somewhere in Internet, not cpu or disk load.
Years ago in DrDobb's a leter writer pointed out that the screaming fast compiler race was irrelevant unless you were a piss poor coder who was doing compile-fix-compile-fix cycles. What mattered was the speed of the compiled product. The letter writer said that if he fired up the compiler and went off to get coffee and chat with his colleagues and it was done when he got back, that was fast enough. Of course controversy ensued!
!!!! I would have been fired if I did that. So I just had wait looking attentively the screen...
The speed of my mail *does* have to do with when the mail is ready on the remote ISP. That in turn depends on when *you* choose to write a reply. Al that dwarfs any time my CPU may spend.
I need often to do text searches in my whole mail store, and they already take too long. On maildir, the search time increases by a factor between 10 and a 100 times. Of course, now I use lucene on dovecot, which speeds up the searches dramatically. But... the indexes are be rebuilt automatically too often for my liking, and they take long. This may improve after I fully switch to dovecot-lda, I still have to find out. I do see the advantages of Maildir, but they don't outweight the advantages I do need and use from mbox. It can, and is, different for other people or use cases. My preferred mail folder format would be "mix". But that will not happen... -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)