🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990Aug9.152342.29200@zoo.toronto.edu>
			henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>however:  an article in "junk" can be
>passed on, because relaying and filing are semi-independent operations, so
>an unknown newsgroup can go into "junk" and still go on to your neighbors.

I have realized this - that was the initial setup, until disk space
got excessively tight.  There were days we couldn't get new news
because of the old stuff.

>This isn't a wonderful idea on a routine basis, though, as the stuff is
>*still* there on your system, and it runs the "junk" article numbers up
>awfully quickly.

I'm not all that concerned about the article numbers in junk.  Worse
comes to worse, it can be reset by hand.  What I *do* worry about is
the downstream site that wants to subscribe to (let's say) most of the
binaries groups (the groups with the smallest demand here).  It would
appear to be (diskwise) more convenient to receive the article just
long enough to batch/compress it, and then kill our copy of it.

What it looks like (through email and followups) is that I *do* have
to have a local copy, at least until the batcher gets run, and the
article is packed up for transmission.

Thanks for the answers and suggestions.

j
-- 
Jeffrey L. Bromberger
System Operator---City College of New York---Science Computing Facility
jeffrey@sci.ccny.cuny.edu			jeffrey@ccnysci.BITNET
	Anywhere!{cmcl2,philabs,phri}!ccnysci!jeffrey