• RAMSG purging on 2.02

    From Dran Draggore@1:218/215 to All on Mon Apr 11 04:11:01 2016
    I'm currently using RemoteAccess 2.02.

    According to WHATSNEW.250, it says:

    RAMSG 2.50.b4
    =============

    * When purging messages in the Hudson message base by date, RAMSG will
    now treat dates where the year is smaller than 80 to be in the 21st
    century (20xx).

    Does this mean that older versions of RAMSG will delete messages created in 2016 ?
    --- SBBSecho 2.33-Linux
    * Origin: (1:218/215)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Dran Draggore on Mon Apr 11 10:07:26 2016

    11 Apr 16 04:11, you wrote to All:

    I'm currently using RemoteAccess 2.02.

    why?

    According to WHATSNEW.250, it says:

    RAMSG 2.50.b4
    =============

    * When purging messages in the Hudson message base by date, RAMSG
    will
    now treat dates where the year is smaller than 80 to be in the 21st
    century (20xx).

    Does this mean that older versions of RAMSG will delete messages created
    in
    2016 ?

    are you using the HMB?

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey

    ... I'm just a simple man.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Dran Draggore@1:218/215 to mark lewis on Tue Apr 12 06:23:24 2016
    Re: RAMSG purging on 2.02
    By: mark lewis to Dran Draggore on Mon Apr 11 2016 10:07 am


    I'm currently using RemoteAccess 2.02.

    why?
    RAMSG 2.50.b4
    =============

    * When purging messages in the Hudson message base by date, RAMSG
    will
    now treat dates where the year is smaller than 80 to be in the
    21st
    century (20xx).

    Does this mean that older versions of RAMSG will delete messages
    created
    in
    2016 ?

    are you using the HMB?
    --- SBBSecho 2.33-Linux
    * Origin: (1:218/215)
  • From Dran Draggore@1:218/215 to mark lewis on Tue Apr 12 06:33:42 2016
    Re: RAMSG purging on 2.02
    By: mark lewis to Dran Draggore on Mon Apr 11 2016 10:07 am

    I'm currently using RemoteAccess 2.02.

    why?

    It was the first version I ever used.

    RAMSG 2.50.b4
    =============

    * When purging messages in the Hudson message base by date, RAMSG
    will
    now treat dates where the year is smaller than 80 to be in the
    21st
    century (20xx).

    Does this mean that older versions of RAMSG will delete messages
    created
    in
    2016 ?

    are you using the HMB?

    I plan on using HMB for local message areas. And JAM for echoes. I think this adds authenticity to the deployment. I've already created 200 unfilled areas since the documentation says Hudson can only use 200. Heh.

    I could just experiment but since I'm still reading the documentation, I thought I'd get an answer in advance; and check out the RA_SUPPORT echo, which is apparently bustling with activity.
    --- SBBSecho 2.33-Linux
    * Origin: (1:218/215)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Dran Draggore on Tue Apr 12 13:28:30 2016

    12 Apr 16 06:33, you wrote to me:

    I'm currently using RemoteAccess 2.02.

    why?

    It was the first version I ever used.

    mmmkay...

    Does this mean that older versions of RAMSG will delete messages
    created in 2016 ?

    are you using the HMB?

    I plan on using HMB for local message areas. And JAM for echoes. I
    think this adds authenticity to the deployment. I've already created
    200 unfilled areas since the documentation says Hudson can only use
    200. Heh.

    you'd be better off using JAM for everything... then you won't have to worry about any of the limitations of HMB at all... 200 areas is a limitation of HMB... then there's also that all areas share the same 16Meg limitation and that only a certain number of posts can even exist in HMB... in its day, HMB was the shizz but that has long since passed...

    I could just experiment but since I'm still reading the documentation,
    I thought I'd get an answer in advance; and check out the RA_SUPPORT
    echo, which is apparently bustling with activity.

    they all are quite busy with activity... they wouldn't even be available any more if i weren't specifically keeping them listed and at least posting the rules monthly...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey

    ... Man does not live by bread alone. He must have peanut butter - Dave Gardner ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Dran Draggore@1:3634/12 to mark lewis on Thu Apr 14 06:39:00 2016
    you'd be better off using JAM for everything... then you
    won't have to worry about any of the limitations of HMB at
    all... 200 areas is a limitation of HMB... then there's
    also that all areas share the same 16Meg limitation and
    that only a certain number of posts can even exist in
    HMB... in its day, HMB was the shizz but that has long
    since passed...

    This is something I wanted clarified in the documentation.

    So are you saying that HMB in total is limited to 16 mb ? or are you saying that HMB is limited to 16 mb per area ? - in which case it's worse than *.MSG, because *.MSG is unlimited depending on OS.

    What's the limit for posts ? and is it per area or in total of HMB ?

    they all are quite busy with activity... they wouldn't even
    be available any more if i weren't specifically keeping
    them listed and at least posting the rules monthly...

    Is there some automated purge on inactive echoes somewhere high up in the chain of command ?

    Also those monthly rules are annoying. Instead of posting every month, can't you find a tool that only posts rules after a certain period of inactivity ?


    * Origin: (1:3634/12)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Dran Draggore on Thu Apr 14 09:57:20 2016

    14 Apr 16 06:39, you wrote to me:

    you'd be better off using JAM for everything... then you
    won't have to worry about any of the limitations of HMB at
    all... 200 areas is a limitation of HMB... then there's
    also that all areas share the same 16Meg limitation and
    that only a certain number of posts can even exist in
    HMB... in its day, HMB was the shizz but that has long
    since passed...

    This is something I wanted clarified in the documentation.

    i don't know that it has ever been documented anywhere... coders working with the HMB would know these limitations because of the raw structure of the format...

    So are you saying that HMB in total is limited to 16 mb ? or are you saying
    that HMB is limited to 16 mb per area ? - in which case it's worse than *.MSG, because *.MSG is unlimited depending on OS.

    What's the limit for posts ? and is it per area or in total of HMB ?

    the HMB is made of five files... one that holds the message text (MSGTXT.BBS) and the others containing indexes and pointers into the message text file... the limits are

    200 maximum areas
    32k total messages
    16M maximum size of message data file

    other than the 200 area limit, these values are dictated by the structure of the format... in pascal, a string is a 256 byte array of characters... the zeroth byte (programmers always start counting from zero and yes, zero is a number) contains the length of the string which is 0 to 255... there is always 256 bytes allocated for a string... even if there's only one character in it...

    eg:
    1a
    - 1 is the zeroth byte and says there's one character in the string.
    - 'a' is the one character in the string.

    10applesauce
    - 10 is the zeroth byte and says there's ten characters in the string.
    - 'applesauce' is the ten characters in the string.

    NOTE: if you were to use a hex editor, you would not see the 1 or the 10 in the
    zeroth byte position, instead you would see the actual ASCII ^A (#1) and ^J (#10) characters... if the string was 32 characters long, the first byte would be the space character (#32)... 64 characters would be the @ (#64) character...

    MSGTXT.BBS is a huge file of string records, each record is 256 bytes in size and contains up to 255 characters... the largest value a word (two bytes) can hold is 65535 and a word is the size of the indexes and pointers used... so 256
    * 65535 = 16Meg... there was simply no way to have a file any larger than that at that time... 32767 was the largest positive number an integer could hold... that gives us the 32K limit of total messages... 200 areas? probably could easily have been 255 but 200 was a nice round number and what BBS ever had a need for more than 200 areas, right? ;)

    type range size
    ==========================================
    shortint | -128..127 | 8bit
    integer | -32768..32767 | 16bit
    longint | -2147483648..2147483647 | 32bit
    byte | 0..255 | 8bit
    word | 0..65535 | 16bit


    so now, you could easily have 200 areas defined and have one message taking up the entire message base... that one message only need use all 65535 records of the MSGTXT.BBS file... yeah, it is a huge message but that's how it works... no
    single area can have more than 32K messages as that is the total maximum of the
    entire structure... if ANY of these limits are passed, the message base is corrupted and the only recovery is to delete the files and start over...


    they all are quite busy with activity... they wouldn't even be
    available any more if i weren't specifically keeping them listed and
    at least posting the rules monthly...

    Is there some automated purge on inactive echoes somewhere high up in
    the chain of command ?

    the backbone removes echos without a certain amount of traffic over a certain period... that's a manual process... there's nothing automated about it...

    Also those monthly rules are annoying. Instead of posting every month, can't you find a tool that only posts rules after a certain period of inactivity ?

    no... they are called monthly rules for a reason... plus when you see them arrive, then you know that you're still connected and a link hasn't been broken
    cutting you off from the echo ;)

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey

    ... There does not seem to be a whole lot of straight vegan males.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Robert Wolfe@1:261/20 to Dran Draggore on Thu Apr 14 19:49:00 2016
    * In a message originally to mark lewis, Dran Draggore said:

    Also those monthly rules are annoying. Instead of posting every month, can't you find a tool that only posts rules after a certain period of inactivity ?

    Wouldn't this, in theory, require EVERY node on Fido to carry the
    echo?

    ---
    * Origin: Neptune's Lair EleBBS | Memphis, TN USA (1:261/20)