Re: JAM Packing
  By: Matt Bedynek to Eric Renfro on Tue Sep 15 2015 04:36 am

 MB> On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 21:37:24 -0400, Eric Renfro wrote:

 ER>> I'm using Jam message bases for everything, including Netmail, so
 ER>> I'm 
 MB> wanting
 ER>> to make sure my message bases don't end up growing to uncontrollable
 ER>> sizes before launching this into production use, so I'm curious.

 ER>> What do I need in order to insure that my message bases are being
 ER>> properly packed and purged according to -p and -$m with Jam
 ER>> echoareas? 

 MB> Fidonet traffic is relatively low I opt to keep everything in all
 MB> echoes except those with automated posts. You have probably already
 MB> been told about sqpack. My gripe is that it automatically renumbers
 MB> message areas. The operations of purge, pack and renumber are
 MB> different operations and should be seperate. hptutil used to be an
 MB> option but is buggy.

Hmmm.. I partially agree with you. Yes they are different operations, but I
prefer it to do all that, so. :)

I can see , possibly, how this might be a problem with a BBS involved though,
if they keep per-user high-water marks differently might cause issues.
Stressing might, though. 

I keep up to 1 years worth of messages and 1,000 messages. If a message base
isn't being used that often and ultimately gets down to 0, perhaps there isn't
enough interest in it and maybe should be removed from distribution. There's
some cases, however, this may not be so useful, like I'm planning to check out
the ENGLISH_TUTOR echo for my wife. She's Japanese, and learning English,
reading, writing and speaking, and may benefit from FidoNet for some of that.
:)

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]
--- SBBSecho 2.27-Linux