From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Subject: Re: refile too slow
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 16:43:44 +0200
Message-ID: <87fuaxk63j.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
References: <CAJcAo8uE4_eTDPdticnkXuTk1nNDasPLYLPR=Tdp-_1UJJsABA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJcAo8u4EsrkJcWv7YRhdZAZrybbkGg57daw8qZm2Yjapcpphw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43536)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1e07NO-0008Ag-On
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 10:43:51 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1e07NL-0001ax-1E
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 10:43:50 -0400
Received: from relay2-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.194]:35171)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>)
	id 1e07NK-0001Zk-R0
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 10:43:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAJcAo8u4EsrkJcWv7YRhdZAZrybbkGg57daw8qZm2Yjapcpphw@mail.gmail.com>
	(Samuel Wales's message of "Sat, 30 Sep 2017 16:59:51 -0700")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Hello,

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> recent maint, but been a problem for a few mo.
>
> refile hits a wall.  depends on number of headers.
>
> i think delete-dups is suspicious here.  is its only purpose to
> eliminate the existing
> header?

Why is delete-dups suspicious? Have you got a very large number of
refile locations? If so, would it make sense to refine your target
definitions?

Its purpose, as its name suggests, is to remove duplicate refile
locations you could get.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou