Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Space Colony Lagrange Point 22° à, 77° Ƅ, 56° ɤ, 99° ɜ
    Posts
    3,166

    Default Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    I notice that whenever threads are moved around in these forums all
    posts in a particular thread *do* get moved to new forum/sub forum in
    the web frontend.

    But when viewing threads through nntp only the latest post is seen. Is
    this how it is supposed to work ?

    --
    GNOME 3.10.1
    openSUSE 13.1 (Bottle) (x86_64) 64-bit
    Kernel Linux 3.11.6-4-desktop

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On 2013-12-01 14:42, vazhavandan wrote:
    > I notice that whenever threads are moved around in these forums all
    > posts in a particular thread *do* get moved to new forum/sub forum in
    > the web frontend.
    >
    > But when viewing threads through nntp only the latest post is seen. Is
    > this how it is supposed to work ?


    Yes.

    Only the web side posts are moved. The person doing the move has to make
    a post saying that he is going to move it, stop posting, and wait till
    that post has gone on the nntp side. Then he does the move, and posts a
    new one saying that it is moved.

    The entire thread is on the new location on the web side. On nntp side,
    however, only the last post saying that it was moved appears on the new
    side, and it is a courtesy so that we can find the thread on nntp -
    otherwise we can not post at all.

    The previous post, saying not post more, remains at the end of the
    thread on the old location on nntp side - and when we see it we must
    refrain from posting there, because if we do we create a new thread on
    the web side at the old forum, with just a single post.

    It is somewhat confusing, and those lone posts do happen some times. It
    needs some effort on the nntp posters to notice those moves (because the
    closing notice is at the end). In thunderbird I mark them with a
    different colour.

    It is also confusing if the last post does not say where it was moved
    from, because we can not know unless we happen to have seen it before
    (and we need to read those posts before answering). Some moderators even
    go to the extra effort of posting a quote of the OP, which is very nice
    for us :-)

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 12.3 x86_64 "Dartmouth" at Telcontar)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    17,317

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:42:39 +0000, vazhavandan wrote:

    > I notice that whenever threads are moved around in these forums all
    > posts in a particular thread *do* get moved to new forum/sub forum in
    > the web frontend.
    >
    > But when viewing threads through nntp only the latest post is seen. Is
    > this how it is supposed to work ?


    Yes, because NNTP doesn't support moves or edits. There's no way to
    effectively move the entire thread that preserves the timestamps (in
    particular).

    That's the way it has always worked.

    Jim



    --
    Jim Henderson
    openSUSE Forums Administrator
    Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On 2013-12-01 19:50, Jim Henderson wrote:
    > On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:42:39 +0000, vazhavandan wrote:


    > Yes, because NNTP doesn't support moves or edits. There's no way to
    > effectively move the entire thread that preserves the timestamps (in
    > particular).


    Mmm... in my private leafnode server I can edit a post if I want to, but
    not using leafnode tools, but brute force file edit. Ie, to do that
    nicely someone would have to create new tools.

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 12.3 x86_64 "Dartmouth" at Telcontar)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    17,317

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 19:58:07 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    > On 2013-12-01 19:50, Jim Henderson wrote:
    >> On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:42:39 +0000, vazhavandan wrote:

    >
    >> Yes, because NNTP doesn't support moves or edits. There's no way to
    >> effectively move the entire thread that preserves the timestamps (in
    >> particular).

    >
    > Mmm... in my private leafnode server I can edit a post if I want to, but
    > not using leafnode tools, but brute force file edit. Ie, to do that
    > nicely someone would have to create new tools.


    That's because leafnode uses a simple file structure rather than a
    database backend. Most NNTP servers don't use a simple file store for
    their spool, but rather use a fairly complex database structure.

    Leafnode isn't intended to be used as a high-volume NNTP server, so it
    doesn't matter if it uses straight file storage or not.

    Jim

    --
    Jim Henderson
    openSUSE Forums Administrator
    Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On 2013-12-01 22:19, Jim Henderson wrote:
    > On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 19:58:07 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:



    >> Mmm... in my private leafnode server I can edit a post if I want to, but
    >> not using leafnode tools, but brute force file edit. Ie, to do that
    >> nicely someone would have to create new tools.

    >
    > That's because leafnode uses a simple file structure rather than a
    > database backend. Most NNTP servers don't use a simple file store for
    > their spool, but rather use a fairly complex database structure.


    Ah. Makes sense.

    They could use an mbox type archive, that's usable for high volume,
    specially as you normally only append. Same as imap servers on mbox.

    > Leafnode isn't intended to be used as a high-volume NNTP server, so it
    > doesn't matter if it uses straight file storage or not.


    Ha. Good point.

    However, I'd bet that a server using leafnode type structure on a
    reiserfs would run as fast.

    I have not experimented with "inn" to know what it uses, though.

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 12.3 x86_64 "Dartmouth" at Telcontar)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    17,317

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 01:38:23 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    > On 2013-12-01 22:19, Jim Henderson wrote:
    >> On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 19:58:07 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    >
    >
    >>> Mmm... in my private leafnode server I can edit a post if I want to,
    >>> but not using leafnode tools, but brute force file edit. Ie, to do
    >>> that nicely someone would have to create new tools.

    >>
    >> That's because leafnode uses a simple file structure rather than a
    >> database backend. Most NNTP servers don't use a simple file store for
    >> their spool, but rather use a fairly complex database structure.

    >
    > Ah. Makes sense.
    >
    > They could use an mbox type archive, that's usable for high volume,
    > specially as you normally only append. Same as imap servers on mbox.


    That doesn't work so well for xover queries and the like. Most NNTP
    servers have different options for configuring the spool depending on the
    message volume and intended use. High-volume NNTP servers host millions
    and millions of messages, not merely tends or hundreds of thousands - and
    they deal with a large number of communications.

    >> Leafnode isn't intended to be used as a high-volume NNTP server, so it
    >> doesn't matter if it uses straight file storage or not.

    >
    > Ha. Good point.
    >
    > However, I'd bet that a server using leafnode type structure on a
    > reiserfs would run as fast.


    I doubt it. Flat text file performance is never as good as a fully-
    indexed system.

    > I have not experimented with "inn" to know what it uses, though.


    I have, but INN isn't what's used here - what's used here are high-end
    commercial servers from Highwinds Software.

    Jim
    --
    Jim Henderson
    openSUSE Forums Administrator
    Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On 2013-12-02 02:41, Jim Henderson wrote:
    > On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 01:38:23 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:


    >> Ah. Makes sense.
    >>
    >> They could use an mbox type archive, that's usable for high volume,
    >> specially as you normally only append. Same as imap servers on mbox.

    >
    > That doesn't work so well for xover queries and the like. Most NNTP
    > servers have different options for configuring the spool depending on the
    > message volume and intended use. High-volume NNTP servers host millions
    > and millions of messages, not merely tends or hundreds of thousands - and
    > they deal with a large number of communications.


    I suppose. But so do large imap servers. I don't know who is using or
    not dovecot at large, but it can use mbox files. Not what they
    recommend, though.


    >>> Leafnode isn't intended to be used as a high-volume NNTP server, so it
    >>> doesn't matter if it uses straight file storage or not.

    >>
    >> Ha. Good point.
    >>
    >> However, I'd bet that a server using leafnode type structure on a
    >> reiserfs would run as fast.

    >
    > I doubt it. Flat text file performance is never as good as a fully-
    > indexed system.


    The designers of Reiserfs claim that you can store databases directly on
    it, using the filesystem as the base-root of the database system, using
    files directly as the records (not the tupla (is that the name?) but the
    individual cells.


    >> I have not experimented with "inn" to know what it uses, though.

    >
    > I have, but INN isn't what's used here - what's used here are high-end
    > commercial servers from Highwinds Software.


    I know :-)

    Code:
    
    > 7.7> 2013-12-02 03:13:05 Telcontar fetchnews 17441 - -  <200 Welcome to forums.novell.com! (Typhoon v2.1.2.394)
    > <7.6> 2013-12-02 03:13:05 Telcontar fetchnews 17441 - -  nntp.opensuse.org: 0 articles posted.
    It identifies itself as "Typhoon".

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 12.3 x86_64 "Dartmouth" at Telcontar)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    17,317

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 02:28:08 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    > I suppose. But so do large imap servers. I don't know who is using or
    > not dovecot at large, but it can use mbox files. Not what they
    > recommend, though.


    Exactly my point.

    >> I doubt it. Flat text file performance is never as good as a fully-
    >> indexed system.

    >
    > The designers of Reiserfs claim that you can store databases directly on
    > it, using the filesystem as the base-root of the database system, using
    > files directly as the records (not the tupla (is that the name?) but the
    > individual cells.


    That's a database abstraction, really, not the same as using the
    filesystem as a database. But either way, not an option with the
    configuration we use.

    >>> I have not experimented with "inn" to know what it uses, though.

    >>
    >> I have, but INN isn't what's used here - what's used here are high-end
    >> commercial servers from Highwinds Software.

    >
    > I know :-)
    >
    >
    Code:
    
    >> 7.7> 2013-12-02 03:13:05 Telcontar fetchnews 17441 - -  <200 Welcome to
    >> forums.novell.com! (Typhoon v2.1.2.394)
    >> <7.6> 2013-12-02 03:13:05 Telcontar fetchnews 17441 - -
    >> nntp.opensuse.org: 0 articles posted.
    >
    >
    > It identifies itself as "Typhoon".


    Yes, that's the product name.

    Jim
    --
    Jim Henderson
    openSUSE Forums Administrator
    Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Doubt regarding viewing moved threads through nntp interface

    On 2013-12-02 03:34, Jim Henderson wrote:
    > On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 02:28:08 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:


    >> The designers of Reiserfs claim that you can store databases directly on
    >> it, using the filesystem as the base-root of the database system, using
    >> files directly as the records (not the tupla (is that the name?) but the
    >> individual cells.

    >
    > That's a database abstraction, really, not the same as using the
    > filesystem as a database. But either way, not an option with the
    > configuration we use.


    I know, I know. I'm only speculating on theories :-)

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 12.3 x86_64 "Dartmouth" at Telcontar)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •