Article View: news.software.b
Article #4786Dataloss with innd/nntplink and slow servers
From: Ian Phillipps
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:16
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:16
69 lines
3850 bytes
3850 bytes
tale@ten.uu.net (David C Lawrence) writes: > If you are a >C News site currently contemplating the INN switch on the basis of >better NNTP performance, you might consider waiting just a little >while longer and giving their NNTP a try. 'Tis ever thus. I installed INN about 10 hours before this posting. With feeds set up as follows: doc.ic.ac.uk\ :*\ :Tc,Wnm,Fnews.doc.ic.ac.uk\ :/home/local/news/bin/nntplink news.doc.ic.ac.uk I.e. the nntplink and inn "share" a spooling/batching file. I'm seeing the following scenario, which occurs when there is some delay sending articles to a remote site: :r!pipe 'tail -400000c /news/logs/syslog | agrep doc' Dec 17 10:50:36 pipe nntplink[18568]: news.doc.ic.ac.uk stats 100 offered 97 accepted 3 rejected 0 failed 1 connects Dec 17 10:50:36 pipe nntplink[18568]: news.doc.ic.ac.uk xmit user 0.7 system 2.2 elapsed 777 Dec 17 10:51:15 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk connected 17 Dec 17 10:51:29 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk:17 closed seconds 14 accepted 4 refused 5 rejected 0 Dec 17 10:54:50 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 cant write Operation would block Dec 17 10:54:50 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 blocked sleeping 120 Dec 17 10:57:52 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 wakeup Dec 17 11:01:18 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk connected 17 Dec 17 11:01:29 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 cant write Operation would block Dec 17 11:01:29 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 blocked sleeping 120 Dec 17 11:03:08 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk:17 closed seconds 110 accepted 1 refused 88 rejected 0 Dec 17 11:03:29 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 wakeup Dec 17 11:03:29 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 cant write Operation would block Dec 17 11:03:29 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 blocked sleeping 240 Dec 17 11:07:32 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 wakeup Dec 17 11:07:32 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 cant write Operation would block Dec 17 11:07:32 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 blocked sleeping 360 Dec 17 11:11:16 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk connected 16 Dec 17 11:11:43 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk:16 closed seconds 27 accepted 1 refused 67 rejected 0 Dec 17 11:13:57 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:18568 cant flush count 5754 Operation would block Dec 17 11:13:57 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk dataloss 5754 Dec 17 11:13:57 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk closed Dec 17 11:15:23 pipe innd: doc.ic.ac.uk spawned doc.ic.ac.uk:19:proc:4068 Dec 17 11:21:17 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk connected 32 Dec 17 11:21:31 pipe innd: frigate.doc.ic.ac.uk:32 closed seconds 14 accepted 1 refused 21 rejected 0 Dec 17 11:26:08 pipe nntplink[4068]: news.doc.ic.ac.uk stats 100 offered 70 accepted 30 rejected 0 failed 1 connects Dec 17 11:26:08 pipe nntplink[4068]: news.doc.ic.ac.uk xmit user 0.4 system 1.1 elapsed 617 ... and off we go again. It looks as if doc's news server just doesn't want to listen for a while. Am I missing something obvious here? Why isn't INN spooling? Or is there something amiss with nntplink? (3.1.0) Is it safe to make innd and nntplink share spooling/batching files like this? If not, how should I join these two programs? All help gratefully appreciated. Ian -- Ian Phillipps, Unipalm Ltd, 216 Science Park, Phone +44 223 420002 Milton Road, Cambridge, CB4 4WA, England. Phax +44 223 426868 PIPEX is a division of Unipalm Ltd. - phone 0223 424616.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Dec17.131639.18996@unipalm.co.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!unipalm!ianShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: news.software.b Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!unipalm!ian From: ian@unipalm.co.uk (Ian Phillipps) Subject: Dataloss with innd/nntplink and slow servers Message-ID: <1992Dec17.131639.18996@unipalm.co.uk> Keywords: innd nntplink dataloss Organization: Unipalm Ltd., 216 Cambridge Science Park, Cambridge CB4 4WA, UK Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:16:39 GMT Lines: 69