Date: Thu, 04 Jul 1996 01:32:43 +0100 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG> To: dk+@ua.net Cc: fports@jraynard.demon.co.uk (James Raynard), ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: nntpbtr port uploaded Message-ID: <11711.836440363@palmer.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 03 Jul 1996 19:14:17 EDT." <199607032314.TAA08867@dog.farm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dmitry Kohmanyuk wrote in message ID <199607032314.TAA08867@dog.farm.org>: > - it remembers which articles haven't been tranferred yet, so when > restarted, it goes straight to getting them before checking for yet > more news; it also doesn't have a havit to check existance of all new > articles before retrieving them, so it is quite useful even if your > link crashes each 20 minutes :-| > - you can kill it and it would save job not yet done for the next time; I THOUGHT slurp did that too .... I've seen something similar. Or maybe it was just checking article ID's against the INN database and cheating. I haven't run INN / slurp here for over a year now. I got fed up with USENET. > - it stacks up to 25 article requests; i.e., it says server to get many > articles withouit waiting for each one of them to arrive. This does > _great_ savings on high-delay lines (even on dial-up, your typical > round-trip time is 150-250ms, so with slurp, you have a delay 2 times > that after each article retreival. slurp DOES stack requests as far as I remember, tho not 25. Gary -- Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?11711.836440363>