On 15 August 2012 11:20, Thufir <hawat.thufir@gmail.com> wrote:
> For hours, thunderbird has been at ~30%cpu, until I used cpulimit to
> bring it down a bit. It's still always running and using the CPU, for
> hours on end.
>
> I just upgraded from 11.10 to 12.04.
What does the Status Viewer tell you it's doing? Re-Indexing all of
your IMAP mail perhaps?
--
Steve
When one person suffers from a delusion it is insanity. When many
people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-15-2012, 11:14 AM
Thufir
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:28:59 +0100, Steve Flynn wrote:
>> I just upgraded from 11.10 to 12.04.
>
> What does the Status Viewer tell you it's doing? Re-Indexing all of your
> IMAP mail perhaps?
How can I tell it not to do that? very annoying, that would make sense.
-Thufir
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-20-2012, 08:38 AM
sam tygier
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On 15/08/12 11:20, Thufir wrote:
> For hours, thunderbird has been at ~30%cpu, until I used cpulimit to
> bring it down a bit. It's still always running and using the CPU, for
> hours on end.
>
> I just upgraded from 11.10 to 12.04.
>
> It's an unanswered question on askubuntu:
>
> http://askubuntu.com/questions/133440/thunderbird-cpu-usage
>
>
>
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Thufir
>
>
on my netbook i get huge cpu usage from thunderbird due to the animated progress bar. if i hide the status bar ( View->Toolbar->Status bar ), then the cpu usage drops off almost completely.
Sam
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-21-2012, 08:13 AM
Thufir
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:38:11 +0100, sam tygier wrote:
> on my netbook i get huge cpu usage from thunderbird due to the animated
> progress bar. if i hide the status bar ( View->Toolbar->Status bar ),
> then the cpu usage drops off almost completely.
Yeah, I notice that most complaints about thunderbird are from laptop/
portables. Dunno why, but it stopped. I guess it was re-indexing or
something, seems to have stopped.
-Thufir
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-21-2012, 08:39 PM
James Freer
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Thufir wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:38:11 +0100, sam tygier wrote:
on my netbook i get huge cpu usage from thunderbird due to the animated
progress bar. if i hide the status bar ( View->Toolbar->Status bar ),
then the cpu usage drops off almost completely.
Yeah, I notice that most complaints about thunderbird are from laptop/
portables. Dunno why, but it stopped. I guess it was re-indexing or
something, seems to have stopped.
-Thufir
Was this on imap? I found that too if it was. I also found Evolution gave
similar trouble. As a result i gave up using a graphical email client, tried
Mutt and settled with Alpine. Alpine i must say i think is superb.
james
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-21-2012, 09:09 PM
Jared Norris
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On 22 August 2012 06:39, James Freer <jessejazza3.uk@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Thufir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:38:11 +0100, sam tygier wrote:
>>
>>> on my netbook i get huge cpu usage from thunderbird due to the animated
>>> progress bar. if i hide the status bar ( View->Toolbar->Status bar ),
>>> then the cpu usage drops off almost completely.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, I notice that most complaints about thunderbird are from laptop/
>> portables. Dunno why, but it stopped. I guess it was re-indexing or
>> something, seems to have stopped.
>>
>>
>> -Thufir
>
>
> Was this on imap? I found that too if it was. I also found Evolution gave
> similar trouble. As a result i gave up using a graphical email client, tried
> Mutt and settled with Alpine. Alpine i must say i think is superb.
>
> james
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
After the initial sync (which is obviously required if I want access
to older mail) I've never had issues. You have to expect the initial
sync to take a bit of effort, it's generally downloading a fair amount
of data and trying to keep it catalogued for you to see what's there.
--
Regards,
Jared Norris
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/JaredNorris
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-21-2012, 11:08 PM
James Freer
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, Jared Norris wrote:
On 22 August 2012 06:39, James Freer <jessejazza3.uk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Thufir wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:38:11 +0100, sam tygier wrote:
on my netbook i get huge cpu usage from thunderbird due to the animated
progress bar. if i hide the status bar ( View->Toolbar->Status bar ),
then the cpu usage drops off almost completely.
Yeah, I notice that most complaints about thunderbird are from laptop/
portables. Dunno why, but it stopped. I guess it was re-indexing or
something, seems to have stopped.
-Thufir
Was this on imap? I found that too if it was. I also found Evolution gave
similar trouble. As a result i gave up using a graphical email client, tried
Mutt and settled with Alpine. Alpine i must say i think is superb.
james
After the initial sync (which is obviously required if I want access
to older mail) I've never had issues. You have to expect the initial
sync to take a bit of effort, it's generally downloading a fair amount
of data and trying to keep it catalogued for you to see what's there.
--
Regards,
Jared Norris
What i found was that it was slow initially as you say but then when one
actually reads several emails it's still a bit slow compared with text only
clients which are instant.
james
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-22-2012, 07:13 AM
Ric Moore
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On 08/21/2012 07:08 PM, James Freer wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, Jared Norris wrote:
On 22 August 2012 06:39, James Freer <jessejazza3.uk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Thufir wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:38:11 +0100, sam tygier wrote:
on my netbook i get huge cpu usage from thunderbird due to the
animated
progress bar. if i hide the status bar ( View->Toolbar->Status bar ),
then the cpu usage drops off almost completely.
Yeah, I notice that most complaints about thunderbird are from laptop/
portables. Dunno why, but it stopped. I guess it was re-indexing or
something, seems to have stopped.
-Thufir
Was this on imap? I found that too if it was. I also found Evolution
gave
similar trouble. As a result i gave up using a graphical email
client, tried
Mutt and settled with Alpine. Alpine i must say i think is superb.
james
After the initial sync (which is obviously required if I want access
to older mail) I've never had issues. You have to expect the initial
sync to take a bit of effort, it's generally downloading a fair amount
of data and trying to keep it catalogued for you to see what's there.
--
Regards,
Jared Norris
What i found was that it was slow initially as you say but then when one
actually reads several emails it's still a bit slow compared with text
only clients which are instant.
Are they using imap as well?? I use pop via gmail with thunderbird, and
once things are dnloaded they are instantaneous as well. Luckily I don't
share my email with other devices, so pop works just peachy for me. Ric
--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-22-2012, 06:45 PM
James Freer
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, Ric Moore wrote:
On 08/21/2012 07:08 PM, James Freer wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012, Jared Norris wrote:
On 22 August 2012 06:39, James Freer <jessejazza3.uk@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Thufir wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:38:11 +0100, sam tygier wrote:
on my netbook i get huge cpu usage from thunderbird due to the
animated
progress bar. if i hide the status bar ( View->Toolbar->Status bar ),
then the cpu usage drops off almost completely.
Yeah, I notice that most complaints about thunderbird are from laptop/
portables. Dunno why, but it stopped. I guess it was re-indexing or
something, seems to have stopped.
-Thufir
Was this on imap? I found that too if it was. I also found Evolution
gave
similar trouble. As a result i gave up using a graphical email
client, tried
Mutt and settled with Alpine. Alpine i must say i think is superb.
james
After the initial sync (which is obviously required if I want access
to older mail) I've never had issues. You have to expect the initial
sync to take a bit of effort, it's generally downloading a fair amount
of data and trying to keep it catalogued for you to see what's there.
--
Regards,
Jared Norris
What i found was that it was slow initially as you say but then when one
actually reads several emails it's still a bit slow compared with text
only clients which are instant.
Are they using imap as well?? I use pop via gmail with thunderbird, and once
things are dnloaded they are instantaneous as well. Luckily I don't share my
email with other devices, so pop works just peachy for me. Ric
Hi Ric
Just out of interest what are the pros-cons of using pop compared with imap. I
don't know - other than i belong to a large number of IT lists, yahoogroups dog
lists etc. So i thought imap was best as i can scan through emails and delete
without downloading... pop i thought downloaded all which i've thought would
have quite an impact on my broadband allowance.
thanks
james
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
08-22-2012, 09:36 PM
Thufir
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:45:29 +0100, James Freer wrote:
> Just out of interest what are the pros-cons of using pop compared with
> imap.
IMAP is **much** better than POP3. Wikipedia is probably the
authoritative source.
Basically, POP will (and I'm sure this is a pun) will "pop" from the
stack of e-mails on the server, and, depending on settings, are generally
then removed from the server.
IMAP is a synch. E-mails are stored server side and then the client
downloads usually a portion of server side e-mails. Several clients can
synch concurrently.
-Thufir
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
thunderbird at ~30% cpu
