 | | Re: Query regarding the <set:foo> function
|
|
(...) using a greedy match where it should have been using a non-greedy match. The "<snip>" that appeared earlier on the line confused it. Thanks for reporting the err. --Todd (25 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Query regarding the <set:foo> function
|
|
Hi Todd, I'm curious as to why this worked: (URL) this didn't: (URL) (25 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it time for lugnet.build.sculpture ?
|
|
(...) Maybe there sh/could be a direct link to .build from the LUGNET home page? "Check out what other fans are building, or post about your own creations!" (...) I think the problem is for people to *find* .build. Once they've gone that far, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.build)
|
| |
| | Re: Preview: LUGNET T-Shirts, Mousepads, Coffee Mugs
|
|
Just curious...will the Mugs be available anytime soon? TIA, Jason "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:FwuI3E.ICz@lugnet.com... (...) color-matching (...) itself (...) logo (...) the (...) shirts (...) of (...) and (...) aren't (...) (25 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | How does shop function work?
|
|
How does your shop function "pick up" that a store sells a particular set. For instance Etoys and Wal-mart are carrying the 8458, but it doesn't show up under the shop function. Please explain. Rose (25 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | LUGNET is fast today
|
|
I noticed a significant increase in speed when loding pages today, especially the front news page. Also the pages load different than before - the whole page just pops up when its done loading. The effect is like setting Response.Buffer = True in (...) (25 years ago, 25-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
(...) It seems that slow DNS is the culprit if Todd is right. Why does cutting and pasting make it go faster? If Todd is right, you would have to pay the same DNS price either way. Or is it just a perceived speedup? Well, I've set FUT o-t.geek to (...) (25 years ago, 25-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: dead link?
|
|
(...) Yes. This is now a dead link. I had to take it down a few weeks ago and neglected to inform anyone. The purpose of the page was simply to show that OmniRemote for the Palm could be trained with IR commands from the IR tower or MindStorms (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: News/Discussion Group Traffic (Fri 24 Nov 2000)
|
|
(...) Can you tell it was a US holiday? ;-) Jude (25 years ago, 24-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
(...) It isn't just you. I notice the delay as well on every machine I use - fast or slow, on every connection I use, fast or slow. Last time I looked into this (and I think posted about it) it seemed fairly obvious the biggest delays were had by IE (...) (25 years ago, 24-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
(...) Did I just say that? Oops. That's wrong. There isn't any jump.cgi in the context of NNTP -- only HTTP. Duh. So it's never more than 1 DNS lookup in the case of NNTP and never more then 2 DNS lookups in the case of HTTP -- and in practice, it (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
(...) If you're reading via HTTP, then it's only one resolution because your client will already have resolved www.lugnet.com. If you're reading via NNTP, then it may be two and it may be one depending on your DNS cache. (...) With a typical URL, (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
(...) Well I suppose the nub of this is, if we accept LP's assertion that it is slowing things down, is the cost of doing this worth the benefit. Is the data being collected because it can be collected, or because it needs to be collected? Scott A (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
Let me try to be clearer. (...) This is almost certainly what a lot of it indeed is. Using jump.cgi theoretically doubles the latency since two resolutions are required. But it's not ALL the delay, some surely, is at the server itself while it (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
(...) It's not to track stats on who goes where, although an evil server that wanted to do that could probably do that. Its purpose here is to track how often the where's are being gone to relative to one another and from what pages. It's the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
(...) I’m no expert on this, but I’m pretty sure that, above a certain level, the end users hardware will not affect the problem you mention. The slowness will occur somewhere between the LUGNET server and your computer. For what it is worth, I have (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
Are you sure it's not latency in DNS resolution? That is usually a big factor in how fast a page comes up. A good test is to try the same link again with your browser cache turned off and see what happens. While I understand the usefulness of the (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | "jump.cgi" considered harmful ? (1)
|
|
As preface, for those that don't know what the LUGNET jump.cgi does... It is a way to track stats on who goes where. For example, when I type (URL) into a post, the web interface rendering technology shows the URL in different text color/font and (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it time for lugnet.build.sculpture ?
|
|
Henry Lim wrote in message ... (...) postings (...) Surely that group would be for discussions of how to build sculptures of Eric (our hero!) Kevin (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it time for lugnet.build.sculpture ?
|
|
It doesn't bother me to have a sub-group. What with the sculptures LEGO now offers (giant mini-fig, Statue of Liberty), it seems like a legitimate category. However, what we really need is a lugnet.build.ericharshbarger for his postings and (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
