On Tue, 4 Apr 2000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 11:27:17AM -0400, Chris A. Mattingly wrote: > > > > Caching aside, it will only consult the first server which carries the group > > > and ONLY the first server. It does not consult other servers even if they > > > carry articles not on the first server which has the group. > > > leafnode will do this -- at least according to its documentation. > > And, at least on FreeBSD, leafnode is much, much quicker than nntpcache. > > It works well - the only thing that can cause problems is that it keeps > no history beyond the currently stored articles so it can sometimes get > articles a second time if they are slow enough to appear on one server. That's where you get to have fun playing with expiration times. :) > Leafnode isn't completely transparent to end users (attempts to read an > unread group give a "news will appear shortly" placeholder until the > next sync with the server) and you need to kick off the process that > syncs with the upstream servers yourself. I actually prefer this method. Every 20 minutes, it goes and fetches all the new articles in only the groups I read. nntpcache wouldn't fetch them until I tried to read them, thereby making the news reading process slower. Not to mention, when tin would start up and fetch the active and newsgroup lists, nntpcache (even if it didn't need to hit the new server), it would take at least 60-90 seconds. leafnode takes maybe 2 seconds. Never could figure out why nntpcache was so slow at responding. Heh, guess I could always run beta3 on freebsd, then I just get connection refused messages and don't have to worry about lenghty waits. :) -Chris -- Chris A. Mattingly camattin@camattin.com http://www.camattin.com/ (Don't waste your time :) ) http://www.freebsdzone.com/ (Please visit and give the requested feedback!)
