Subject:
|
Re: LugnetReader
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Wed, 3 May 2000 17:17:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
160 times
|
| |
|
|
Jeremy H. Sproat wrote:
> > > How releasable is your spooler? Good enough to let me work with it for my
> > > client?
> > well, the spooler right now just sits there all the time, getting messages
> > once a minute, and stores them on disk in a spool directory - each message
> > would be stored and linked by at least three indexes - by xref, by avid • ? number, and by groups... The the spooler writes a log file of each
> > incoming message, and the client reads it from the spool dir. Not great,
> > but workable. I plan to write a telnet based interface with it, so remote
> > clients can read the spool as well.
>
> If you have the spooling and indexing portion down, I'd personally give the
> telnet interface top priority now.
well, since it's my only way of reading lugnet atm, I am a little more concenred
with the client... but I'll get to it, eventually :)
> ....The indexing feature brings up the question as to whether the telnet
> interface will be 1-way or 2-way. If it were 2-way, the spooler could
> conceivably serve messages based upon some search criteria. It would rock if
> you can implement a shell for the spooler, with a well-defined command set.
yup, that was the plan (to make it 2 way). I'd like it to be useful for a clientless
client (just someone telneting in), but be powerful for a client - randome msg
retreival, searches (including time!) and references...
>
> > Now I'm just trying to figure out if
> > it's worth the bother, or just use the avid.cgi directly...
>
> Exactly what benefits can be gotten from spooling? The only ones I can think
> of are:
>
> - (semi-) local caching of messages, also a local copy of LUGNET for those
> late-night "where did I post that message" search sessions
> - a common area to save "user profiles"; i.e. read-message markers,
> line-wrapping settings, etc.
also:
- independtant of network connection
- faster
>
> OTOH, the benefits of having the client read avlid.cgi directly are:
>
> - *slightly* lower lag time between a new message and when the client sees
> it
very slight, since the client polls the spool every 5 seconds (with almost no load
generated :). Also, since avid.cgi dolls out msgs in batches of 20, when you log in
after a few hours (say overnight), it might take a while to get them all. Of course,
you'll have msgs to read while it's downloading, but still...
The other problem with using the avid.cgi (and it's not a real problem unless Todd
says it is) is that it will generate more hits on the server... which isn't a big
deal, my bet...
> > Thanks! That'd be great... Do you happen to know if there's a TK module
> > for win?
>
> Yes there is. However, I haven't built this for a while... Are you using the
> Tk module from CPAN?
yah, guess so... er... 8.0, I think.
>
> I'm actually more interested in testing the spooler than the client. And to
> "borrow" (:-) your API ideas to implement a spooler in Java, and to have some
> input on the design of said API if I need something added. My goal is to be
> able to use your spooler with my client, and vice-versa.
yah, that was the whole point of having a client/server model... :)
:)
Dan
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LugnetReader
|
| (...) I am *SO* here. :-, (...) ? number, and by groups... The the spooler writes a log file of each (...) If you have the spooling and indexing portion down, I'd personally give the telnet interface top priority now. ...The indexing feature brings (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
