On Saturday, 7 April 2018 14:35:27 BST Floyd Anderson wrote:
> Hi Mick,
> On Sat, 07 Apr 2018 11:21:23 +0100
> Mick <michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >So far I had been using gdbm, but I now see that emerge also added lmdb.
> Same here, so I gave lmdb a try as hcache backend.
> >Which one is best to use? What have you chosen?
> I assume you mean for speed? I don’t know and it may become very
> academic to answer this. But you can find some none Mutt-specific
> benchmark results on NeoMutt’s website [1].
> Note, the mentioned benchmark page say:
>     “[…] you’ll need a reasonable large number of
>     messages – >50k – to see anything interesting”
> Using lmdb as backend, I do not realise any differences over gdbm within
> Mutt respectively NeoMutt and I doubt one really can (without measuring
> it exactly – which I haven’t done yet).
> References:
>   [1] <https://www.neomutt.org/contrib/hcache-bench>

Thanks Floyd, good information.

I also switched to lmdb now and updated my use flags accordingly for mutt.  I 
see neomutt gaining traction, but I am still running mutt here.  Is there a 
benefit from switching?


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to