Subject: Greedy Pine?

From: [email-masked] (Sam Liddicott)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 16:46:44 GMT

We run pine 3.91 on SCO 3.2v4.2 with 16Meg ram and 20meg swap.
Normally the swap is unused (with 24 users).

Pine causes some swap to be used, and a LOT in some cases.

We could have 10Meg of available ram/swap and one pine session with a 
2.2meg file (mime) can crash because there is not enough memory, or fail 
to fork when sending mail.

Is pine particularly greedy with demands on Ram?  Does SCO implement 
forks rather poorly (no page on write?).

Whats the opinion and how much swap is reccommened.

-- 
--
Sam Liddicott                  |   Nothing I say is to be attributed as
Campbell Scientific Ltd.       | a company statement or representation.
14-20 Field Street, Shepshed,  *----------------------------------------

---

From: Terry Gray <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 09:21:58 -0800 (PST)

One data point: Pine (virtual) memory use will be dramatically affected by
the mailbox format you choose to use.  Pine's mailbox driver for Unix
"mbox" format reads the entire mailbox into virtual memory.  In contrast,
the Tenex driver does not, but there are relatively few mail programs that
support Tenex format, so there is a compatibility tradeoff.

-teg

---

From: [email-masked] (Sam Liddicott)
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 09:55:02 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
>Pine causes some swap to be used, and a LOT in some cases.

To follow up on myself; Terry Gray tells me that pine's unix mbox driver 
loads the whole mailbox into ram.  Oh woe!  Oh well, at least I know.

No wonder its slow compared to elm.