| 1 |
On Sat, 07 Apr 2018 14:42:49 +0100 |
| 2 |
Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>On Saturday, 7 April 2018 14:35:27 BST Floyd Anderson wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Hi Mick, |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> On Sat, 07 Apr 2018 11:21:23 +0100 |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 9 |
>> >So far I had been using gdbm, but I now see that emerge also added lmdb. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Same here, so I gave lmdb a try as hcache backend. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> >Which one is best to use? What have you chosen? |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> I assume you mean for speed? I don’t know and it may become very |
| 16 |
>> academic to answer this. But you can find some none Mutt-specific |
| 17 |
>> benchmark results on NeoMutt’s website [1]. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Note, the mentioned benchmark page say: |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> “[…] you’ll need a reasonable large number of |
| 22 |
>> messages – >50k – to see anything interesting” |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> Using lmdb as backend, I do not realise any differences over gdbm within |
| 25 |
>> Mutt respectively NeoMutt and I doubt one really can (without measuring |
| 26 |
>> it exactly – which I haven’t done yet). |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> References: |
| 30 |
>> [1] <https://www.neomutt.org/contrib/hcache-bench> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
>Thanks Floyd, good information. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
>I also switched to lmdb now and updated my use flags accordingly for mutt. I |
| 35 |
>see neomutt gaining traction, but I am still running mutt here. Is there a |
| 36 |
>benefit from switching? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I think yes but I’m also using both here. Mutt for testing different |
| 39 |
behaviour (sometimes issues) of NeoMutt and NeoMutt as as my day-to-day |
| 40 |
mail client workhorse. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
The main reason for my switch to NeoMutt was that I’ve had no luck with |
| 43 |
colourisation in Mutt (nearly two years ago). TBH, afterwards I realised |
| 44 |
that the problem was sitting in front of the screen and used |
| 45 |
sys-libs/slang instead of sys-libs/ncurses), so no reason for a switch. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
But I like the faster development/release cycle, the goal to clean up |
| 48 |
the 20 years old code base and some features [1] of NeoMutt, e.g. |
| 49 |
Lua-scripting, sidebar; which sometimes find their way into Mutt. I have |
| 50 |
no experiences contributing patches to Mutt but regarded to NeoMutt, it |
| 51 |
meet my expectations and that is fun. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Back to the topic, with a another example. As far as I can tell you |
| 54 |
cannot change the hcache backend without recompiling Mutt where NeoMutt |
| 55 |
implements the ‘$header_cache_backend’ configuration variable for. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
But in the end I can only say forget all things above, I’m only more |
| 58 |
familiar with NeoMutt than with Mutt. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
References: |
| 62 |
[1] <https://www.neomutt.org/feature.html> |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
-- |
| 67 |
Regards, |
| 68 |
floyd |
Archives