Excessive expireover time?
rra at stanford.edu
Thu Jul 20 20:44:40 UTC 2000
Jeff Clark <jclark at xnet.com> writes:
>> Traditional spool and groupbasedexire? INN 2.3 expire for traditional
>> spool is dog-slow. I'm going to fix it eventually, but probably not
>> for a few weeks and probably only in 2.4, depending on how
>> comprehensive the changes end up being.
> The spool is cnfs, and I don't have "groupbasedexpire" in the inn.conf
> file (docs say groupbasedexpire defaults to true).
Hm. In that case, I'm inclined to suspect either swapping or something
odd going on with your buffindexed buffers, but I'm not really qualified
to debug the latter (having not used buffindexed myself yet).
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
More information about the inn-workers