Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bbn!ulowell!swan!arosen From: arosen@hen.ulowell.edu (MFHorn) Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.gnus Subject: Re: GNUS vs. rn Message-ID: Date: 5 Jul 89 19:07:02 GMT References: <442@mqws2.fed.FRB.GOV> <113255@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Sender: news@swan.ulowell.edu Organization: University of Lowell, CS Dept Lines: 22 In-reply-to: page%swap@Sun.COM's message of 29 Jun 89 22:48:19 GMT In article <113255@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> page%swap@Sun.COM (Bob Page) writes: rich@sendai.ann-arbor.mi.us wrote: >Purely subjectively, it [gnus] *feels* faster than rn on my machines. I tried switching from rn to GNUS when 3.12 arrived, and couldn't take the enormous performance hit. I haven't used GNUS w/ an NFS mounted partition, only NNTP. Reading on a 3/280, being served by a decrepid VAX 11/750 (Hi Bob :-) is pretty quick. I can't compare it to rrn, because the 3/280 doesn't have rrn. It is much faster than rrn on a Sequent Balance 21K (20 cpus). I gave up waiting for GNUS on the 21K to read my (513 line) .newsrc . I'd expect GNUS using NNTP would be faster than NFS; you wouldn't have to deal with all the authentication NFS generates. -- Andy Rosen | arosen@swan.ulowell.edu | "I got this guitar and I ULowell, Box #3031 | ulowell!arosen | learned how to make it Lowell, Ma 01854 | | talk" -Thunder Road RD in '88 - The way it should've been