On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 09:23:44PM -0400, John Keimel wrote: > On Fri, May 02, 2003 at 02:34:17AM +0200, Maarten van der Hoef wrote: > > Every day I see multiple replies with the same suggestions just because > > the repliers weren't able to see the latest reply. As hardware costs about > > null > > these days, I wouldn't know any other bottleneck (bandwidth, nehh ). > > So what's the problem with this list ? > > > > Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy with this list, just curious about it's > > big latency. > > Your comment seems like it's wondering about the list server software > and the machine on which it resides. Sure, that could be a factor. > I don't know the specs on that, nor on the volume of this list. > > However, you have to consider that everyone on the list has another > mailserver they get to deal with. So, if the listserver sends its mail > to me and my DSL connection is down, it bounces. Try again in four > hours. It's up? OK, it delivers. THat's 4 hours. I have a pretty well runnning mailserver here which cannot be the reason.
> > I've noticed, running just shy of a dozen lower volume lists, that often > some of the larger providers will just stop accepting mail. "Nope, I'm > not going to take that mail. Try later". So, my list server queues it up > and tries again four hours later. I've had instances where providers > refuse mail for DAYS, though it's more often just hours. That's not the issue here. > > And then you have time zones. Funny how the people in Australia always > seem to be so chipper when I'm so sleepy! No, sorry, you'll have to > wait for my reply until I'm awake. It's not the time between replies , it's the time between I mail my post, and when I get it back from the list. > And I'm not sure or not, but in most list servers, you can set your self > up for 'digest mode' because you hate the inane babble repeatedly during > the day, so you subject yourself to it only in one big massive dose so > it feels less painful. Then the list feeling disappears :) > To wonder about the list and people replying late is less a question of > the server that's sending the mail out, as it's only ONE factor of many. > I'd be confident that the list server is beefy enough for what it's > being asked to do, though I could be wrong. Take yer pick as to why > people 'reply late' to questions, but there's a lot of different answers > as to why. Again, I exclude the human factor here, someone posts a question , it takes about 15 minutes for i have it in my mailbox. Mr John Doe repies on that certain question, and 5 minutes later , I don't see any replies, so I reply as well. Same suggestions. Ofcourse double answers are better than nothing. > (wondering how long ago you wrote your post and how much time has > elapsed until my reply. Perhaps I should have waited a couple days, just > for effect ;) Hehe, some hours now.. > > j Regards, Maarten > > -- > > ================================================== > + It's simply not | John Keimel + > + RFC1149 compliant! | [EMAIL PROTECTED] + > + | http://www.keimel.com + > ================================================== > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_+_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_+_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Maarten v.d. Hoef | Cysonet Engineering | [EMAIL PROTECTED] +31611413687 | The magic behind the buzzwords | phone +31 20 4703339 -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_+_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_+_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
