POP3: Do not update the message count as we download each message.

VERIFIED INVALID

Status

MailNews Core
Networking: POP
VERIFIED INVALID
16 years ago
9 years ago

People

(Reporter: Navin Gupta, Assigned: Navin Gupta)

Tracking

({perf})

Trunk
x86
Windows NT

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Assignee)

Description

16 years ago
We can do this somehing like on every second, third or fifth message. Do
you buy this approach?
(Assignee)

Updated

16 years ago
Keywords: perf

Comment 1

16 years ago
actually, I don't buy this. Pop3 download for me is so slow (because, remember,
we're downloading the whole msg body instead of just the hdrs as we do for news
and imap), that updating the counts doesn't significantly slow us down, and is
actually useful. An approach I would buy (though I don't think it's worth it) is
to only update the counts every 1/2 to 1 second or so. The complexity of this
might make this not so worthwhile, because you have to make sure the last count
gets updated correctly.
(Assignee)

Comment 2

16 years ago
I know we download the entire msg. We know when we are downloading last 
message so we can do it on every 1/2 or 1 second and on the last message. 
We can use something like PR_interval to record the difference in times
because everything is happening on the same thread. 

Comment 3

16 years ago
I'm just saying because we download the whole message, it's a lot slower then
imap or news, so that the percentage of time spent updating the count is a lot
less than the percentage of time downloading the message. For example, the
average pop message probably has at least 50 lines, whereas the the news hdr
info comes in one line. I've had several pop3 servers from isps, over broadband
connections, and I'm lucky if I get more than one or two messages downloaded per
second. Given that the time to update the count is measured in microseconds, and
that we're really bottlenecked on the pop3 download code, which runs on a
different thread, my guess is that this is just not going to help. Does this
make sense?
(Assignee)

Comment 4

16 years ago
makes sense. marking invalid. 
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID

Comment 5

16 years ago
verified invalid.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Product: MailNews → Core
Product: Core → MailNews Core
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.