[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request
From: |
David Levine |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request |
Date: |
Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:30:56 -0500 |
Ken wrote:
> I was just wondering, since the sequence checking code was first in
> m_convert(). I just checked; if you create a numeric sequence by hand,
> yes, you totally can use it!
At your own peril. It clearly violates the documentation.
> So the default case is you don't need the
> second call to folder_read(). I think what we should do here is:
>
> - If you don't give the -seq flag to pick, don't make the second call to
> folder_read().
Here's an irrelevant observation, given that we don't want to remove
-seq at this point: pick -seq has always bothered me a little as
being impure. I would argue that the output of pick should be fed to
mark if you want to define any sequences.
> - Create a new option to control whether or not you want to maintain
> a lock during the whole run of inc and pick. I say default to NOT
> having the lock during the full run of these commands and have two
> calls to folder_read(); people with 100K+ messages in a single folder
> could enable this flag. I do not know what to call this flag; -fulllock?
> Too many 'l's in a row, for one.
>
> What do others think?
Somehow that ended up backwards from what I think would be the goal,
which is to have only one folder_read() on large folders. Would
this work: add, and default to, -lock? If a user trusts themself
to do only one operation at a time, and they want the speed, they
could use -nolock.
David
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Ken Hornstein, 2014/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Erich Boleyn, 2014/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Ken Hornstein, 2014/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Erich Boleyn, 2014/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Jerrad Pierce, 2014/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, David Levine, 2014/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Ken Hornstein, 2014/12/05
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Ken Hornstein, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, David Levine, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Ken Hornstein, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request,
David Levine <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Ken Hornstein, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, David Levine, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Ken Hornstein, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, David Levine, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, norm, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Lyndon Nerenberg, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Earl Hood, 2014/12/04
- Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, heymanj, 2014/12/04
Re: [Nmh-workers] MH-W intro/help request, Robert Elz, 2014/12/01