Re: X performance suffers under emacs 21.1.1

[Gerd Moellmann]

address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:

> > Can you please explain why?  I tend to think that such a limit would
> > rarely have the ``right'' value.
> 
> To avoid a situation where the cache grows beyond any reasonable limit.
> I don't know what the right limit is - but maybe 100 images
> or 10 MB would be enough?  

That's exactly the problem I see with this approach: what is a good
limit?  It varies with usage, available memory and what amount you
want Emacs to use (it's swap, BTW if images aren't displayed), it
depends if you're remote or not (keeping the traffic down) etc.

That's why I think it's more desirable to find ways to predict which
images are likely not being displayed in the future and uncache these.