Re: [Evolution-hackers] ... and how camel should be

[Philip Van Hoof <spam pvanhoof be>]

On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 13:02 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 18:57 +0100, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> 
> I really don't think the message IDs are the main source of bloat in
> Evo.

I measured it ;-)

10.000 E-mails used +-8MB of memory.

This is how I quickly measured it.

gint s=0;

static void measure (gpointer data, gpointer user_data)
{
	s += strlen ((const char*)data);
}

GPtrArray *uids = camel_folder_get_uids (folder);
g_ptr_array_foreach (uids, measure, NULL);
g_print ("%d\n", s);

Luckily the format of those message ids is a small string version of the
follow-up number. So "0","1", "2", .. "9999". So it's a lot small
strings. Which is of course better then a lot "message-id" headers

But if it's a follow-up, I wonder why not simply return the total amount
of messages in a folder, and let the developer use a simple loop like:

for (i=0; i<that_length; i++)
{
	msg = camel_ folder_get_message_info (folder, i);
}

I didn't measure the size of the CamelMessageInfo after doing camel_
folder_get_message_info (folder, data) on each of those messages.

Given the fact that evolution seems to simply load all the header
information, I fear also that should be added to the count.




-- 
Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend 
home: me at pvanhoof dot be 
gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org 
work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be 
http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be