Hi Ken, > > A script that was using mark(1) was sluggish on a local-disk folder > > with approx. 6,500 emails and many extra files after rmm, refile, > > etc. Deleting those, or using the script on a directory with less > > inodes, was a lot snappier. > > It would be nice to understand what was so sluggish; system call > tracing would be interesting here. Sadly, I think we're limited by > the operating system here in many cases; some Unix filesystems simply > don't behave well when dealing with a lot of files in a single > directory.
It's Linux with ext4 on a local SATA hard disk. Next time it's built up enough to slug I'll have a look. `ls -f' wasn't slow so I suspect some per-item overhead in nmh. > It seems that this behavior is generally what you want... Agreed. I wasn't trying to get it changed, just that its behaviour is non-obvious and undocumented. Yes, I know, patches welcome. :-) Cheers, Ralph. _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
