On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 18:07:43 -0400, da...@tethera.net wrote:
> This is posting 3 of the patch. The second version fixed a bug. This
> version replaces calloc/realloc with talloc equivalents, prettifies
> the comparison function for qsort, reindents, and adds a bunch of
> whitespace.
It's odd that
On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 18:07:43 -0400, david at tethera.net wrote:
> This is posting 3 of the patch. The second version fixed a bug. This
> version replaces calloc/realloc with talloc equivalents, prettifies
> the comparison function for qsort, reindents, and adds a bunch of
> whitespace.
It's odd t
From: David Bremner
The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads to
a large performance improvement.
Since I had to rewrite
From: David Bremner
The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads to
a large performance improvement.
Since I had to rewrite
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 23:14:48 -0400, da...@tethera.net wrote:
> The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
> tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
> differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads
> to
> a large
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 23:14:48 -0400, david at tethera.net wrote:
> The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
> tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
> differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads
> to
> a la
From: David Bremner
The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads to
a large performance improvement.
Since I had to rewrite
Excerpts from david's message of Mon Dec 07 19:14:48 -0800 2009:
> The patch allocates a temporary array to keep track of the current
> list of tags using calloc and grows it as neccesary using realloc.
The codebase has already well established the use of the talloc library. Why
did you break with
Excerpts from david's message of Mon Dec 07 19:14:48 -0800 2009:
> The patch allocates a temporary array to keep track of the current
> list of tags using calloc and grows it as neccesary using realloc.
The codebase has already well established the use of the talloc library. Why
did you break with
From: David Bremner
The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads to
a large performance improvement.
Since I had to rewrite
From: David Bremner
The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads to
a large performance improvement.
Since I had to rewrite
From: David Bremner
The main feature of this patch is that it compares the list of current
tags on a message with those read by restore. Only if the two lists
differ is the tag list in the message replaced. In my experiments this leads to
a large performance improvement.
Since I had to rewrite
12 matches
Mail list logo