Re: Xnews out of memory problem

gta@xxxxxx wrote in news:94WdnSkeu6I2rojZRVn-gQ@xxxxxxxxxxxx:

Luu Tran <xnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:Xns97845993FAA87luutrangeocities@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:

gta@xxxxxx wrote in
news:uaSdnTOh7qE5konZnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that Xnews
makes no effort to conserve the usage of physical ram, it
simply downloads all headers into ram, before sorting and
then storing the headers. If there are too many headers
to fit in the physical ram, kaboom, because it doesn't
even try to make room by writing freshly-downloaded data
to the hard drive. I've tried to download headers in a
piece-meal fashion, sadly to avail, because Xnews insists
on loading old headers into physical ram before
downloading the new ones.

correct. When I started Xnews, you had like 5000 new
headers a day. Now it's more like 100,000+ on heavy
groups. But I haven't bothered to change memory handling.

Two things you can do: 1) limit # of headers you get at
one time. 2) turn off header storage, or in a crunch just
delete the relevant .hdr and .mbx files in data\


Thank you very much for the reply, and more thanks for the
great work you put into this awesome free news reader.

A quick response to your suggestions: suggestion (1) is all
that I can do right now, and suggestion (2) is not very
practical to me as turning off storage would mean
re-downloading all the headers each time I visit a
newsgroup, with some of more active groups having close to
10 million total posts, it literally takes close to an hour
on my not-so-shabby cable connectoin.

I've tried quite a few newsgroup readers, Forte's Agent for
example, but I always find Xnews to be far more intuitive,
more user-friendly, and with a much less steep learning
curve. I sincerely hope that some day in the future, Xnews
would be fitted with a more comptemporary memory handling
routine.

Thanks again.


{Hello again my dear friends (you know who you are)}

Some of the more 4D-life-less of us spent a good many hours
discussing this problem in February. At first anyway, then
everybody just let me have it from all their holes because I
dared to suggest using basic common sense and logic instead of
telling the then-OP to just bite his nails and wait until Vista
solves ALL his problems, or to get 12GB of RAM, or a couple of
300GB drives JUST for Xnews.

(BTW, what DO you do with ten million headers if you can't even
find a thread DIRECTLY related to your problem in a
relatively small group???)

I contributed what I consider a very practical solution. From
the OP >THIS< time, it seems even more obvious (to me, of
course, and DON'T FORGET, I'M STUPID!) that even a top of the
line machine does not solve the XN memory problem.

Since I was immediately attacked by a moron named SINNER (his
caps) on almost every OPINION I stated (and I can't be bothered
to re-read the whole elephantine thread - and I am not aware of
the "find" feature because I'm STUPID) I don't remember if I
ever got around to mentioning that I have my 2.5MB (as dl'd,
just group names) GN rc file divided into about 12 smaller files
and I keep them clean and small, CONSTANTLY, sometimes
automatically, sometimes manually.

Manual IS better (for EVERYTHING), I don't care what you say.

And =YES= I am still using a 166 with 64MB of RAM and now that
I've switched firewalls I no longer have the occasional DoS-like
freezes which I have experienced over the last few months (YOU
know what I'm talking about). So now it runs 100% perfect, off-
AND on-line. And it boots in less than 20 seconds. How fast do
YOUR XP Trojan Zoos boot up?

Notwithstanding that I just asked this question, again, WHAT THE
*** does ANYONE DO with ten million headers, let alone WHY
WOULD ANYONE STORE THEM?

Could someone PLEASE explain this to me???
Remember, I'm STOOOOPID!!! (It WAS unanimous!)
.

Quantcast