From xemacs-m  Sun Jan 19 00:31:17 1997
Received: from crystal.WonderWorks.COM (crystal.WonderWorks.com [192.203.206.1])
          by xemacs.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id AAA09437 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 00:31:16 -0600 (CST)
Received: by crystal.WonderWorks.COM 
	id QQbzda12368; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 01:31:16 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 01:31:16 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <QQbzda12368.199701190631@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
From: Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com>
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: 19.15b90: slow status messages
In-Reply-To: <kig20bip9zh.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
References: <QQbzcq10256.199701190403@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
	<kig20bip9zh.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>

Hrvoje Niksic writes:
 > Kyle Jones (kyle_jones@wonderworks.com) wrote:
 > [...]
 > > I was stunned at how slowly it ran.  Try it.  I wonder how much
 > > faster VM would startup if I didn't print status messages.
 > 
 > Looks fast to me (the last digit gets blurred) -- 1000 messages go in
 > 15 or so seconds, *with* frequent interruptings of garbage
 > collection.  Exactly how slow is it for you?

24 seconds.  Roughly 41 message calls per second.  So when
visiting a folder of 150 messages, I could cut VM's startup time
by a second by just dropping the status messages.

