[ietf-nntp] OVER message-id

[Charles Lindsey]

In <3FE6E4E7.4030908 at proxad.net> Francois Petillon <fantec at proxad.net> writes:

>> I can see that in such a system B, C and D do not need to keep history
>> files (though how do they then know when articles have expired from A, or
>> been cancelled)?

>There is no direct synchronization between spooler and frontal on 
>article expiration. Expiration is done by batch (on spooler, il will
>remove old spool files, on dreaderd, it will, group per group, mark
>old entries as deleted). Direct synchronisation (ie mark an entry as
>deleted when an article is removed) would hit disk I/O.

So the spooler and the server may expire at different times. An article
may be expired on the one but not on the other, either way around?

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl at clerew.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5