| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | Compression question |
Hello Mike! 11 Jul 03 11:42, you wrote to me: BS>> Okey! It doesn't use TOPDOWN properly. MT> Be sure and tack in an IMHO for that... :) MT> Squish can do tossing, scanning, packing, and routing combined in each MT> and every run. That means that the length of each run may vary MT> dramatically. Yeah most tossers can do that. (I don't know of any whitch can't). MT> Scott's approach requires reinterpretation of the outbound's state at MT> each step in ROUTE.CFG instead of at the beginning of the run only. MT> It is synonymous with wildcard processing of filenames in a BAT/CMD MT> file, which =IMHO= is a better example of "proper" top-down than any MT> specific approach of any specific tosser. :) Agreed. MT> While I'm not prepared MT> to install/extensively test to confirm my suspicions, I suspect that MT> the Confmail approach would also be more susceptible to concurrency MT> issues then the Squish approach with multiple LAN nodes manipulating MT> outbound at the same time. Hmm..? MT> At minimum it means that Squish may get MT> work done in the same run that wouldn't get done until a subsequent MT> run with the Confmail approach. What does Confmail has to do with Squish (something i might have missed). Regards, Bo ... It's nice to be important but it's more important to be nice! --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5* Origin: The Night Express, Roennede DK (2:236/100) SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 @PATH: 236/100 237/9 20/11 106/1 2000 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.