Re: [Evolution-hackers] mmap() for the summary file

2006-06-19 Thread Florian Boor
Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: H... I am not really convinced yet; I mean even when I have 100 mails with the same email address in my Inbox (which seems a lot from one person!). The email-address would be 20 chars; now having 'm all in one string saves me, even in this extreme case, only

Re: [Evolution-hackers] mmap() for the summary file

2006-06-19 Thread Philip Van Hoof
On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 11:56 +0200, Florian Boor wrote: as long as we talk about individual senders this is true, but if you think about mailinglists and all this automated server notifications this could save quite some memory. As long as it is possible to implement this without a too big

[Evolution-hackers] mmap() for the summary file

2006-06-11 Thread Philip Van Hoof
Hi there, I've been trying to replace the fread()/fopen() implementation in camel-folder-summary.c with an mmap() one. I know camel-file-utils.c will put duplicate strings in a hashtable and that way reduce memory usage for the summary information. Because a lot mail boxes have duplicate strings

[Evolution-hackers] mmap() for the summary file

2006-06-11 Thread Philip Van Hoof
Hi there, I've been trying to replace the fread()/fopen() implementation in camel-folder-summary.c with an mmap() one. I know camel-file-utils.c will put duplicate strings in a hashtable and that way reduce memory usage for the summary information. Because a lot mail boxes have duplicate strings