Pete,
2-3.0i9 seems to be fine for me.
John
-
John W. Enyart
EAI, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 7:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [sniffer] 2-3.0i9 looks good to me... How about
Since we've been running it our Queue monitors have stopped alerting.
This is a good thing as that means the queues are no longer hitting 100%
between 5 min. sample periods.
So, me thinks it's pretty well optimized now.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
On Tuesday, October 26, 2004, 11:03:45 AM, Glenn wrote:
GB can you send the link to this again
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Betas/MessageSniffer2-3.0i9-Distribution.zip
There you go,
_M
This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
Do we have a timetable for this new release Sorry cant afford
time to beta test!
I do get alarmed at the huge .snf file at around 14 meg for my
personal rule base.. Is this optimised in any way or will
continue to grow?
_Nick
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
On Tuesday, October 26, 2004, 7:02:53 PM, Nick wrote:
NJ Do we have a timetable for this new release Sorry cant afford
NJ time to beta test!
The current interim version will be republished as the official
release tonight. There will be no changes other than re-tagging the
build info.
NJ I