Re: [fetchmail-devel] save_str problems.

[Rainer W. <rwe...@ms...>]

Sunil Shetye <sh...@bo...> writes:
> Quoting from Rainer Weikusat's mail on Mon, May 03, 2010:
>> > Matthias, you have said that the regular uidl code is faster than the
>> > fastuidl code for 10000 uids. Do you mean while processing 10000 uids
>> > on the fetchmail side or while getting 10000 uids from the server?
>> >
>> > The fastuidl code downloads less UIDs from the server and hence has to
>> > compare less UIDs to check for new mail. If there are very few new
>> > mails, then the fastuidl code is expected to save a lot on the string
>> > comparisons.
>> 
>> It is conceivable that the string comparisons take less wallclock
>> time than repeatedly asking a server for an UID and waiting for the
>> replies does. IMHO, this is still a bad tradeoff because 'e-mail
>> download' is a background batch job and even on a single-user
>> workstation, minizing e-mail download time at the expense of directing
>> more resources away from the interactive jobs the user interacts with
>> doesn't really make sense except if one is using a uplink whose cost
>> is proportional to the time spent 'online'.
>
> As Matthias has already said, the better solution is to use the
> appropriate data structures like trees or hashes or vectors in order
> to cut down both searches and modifications.

Sorry, but you are seriously lost in space here. I have no idea which
thought could have motivated you to reply with this to my attempt at
an explanation of the 'faster with 10000 UIDs' statement.