Subj : Compression question
To   : Mike Tripp
From : Bo Simonsen
Date : Fri Jul 11 2003 09:50 pm

Hello Mike!

11 Jul 03 11:42, you wrote to me:

 BS>> Okey! It doesn't use TOPDOWN properly.

 MT> Be sure and tack in an IMHO for that... :)

 MT> Squish can do tossing, scanning, packing, and routing combined in each
 MT> and every run.  That means that the length of each run may vary
 MT> dramatically.

Yeah most tossers can do that. (I don't know of any whitch can't).

 MT> Scott's approach requires reinterpretation of the outbound's state at
 MT> each step in ROUTE.CFG instead of at the beginning of the run only.
 MT> It is synonymous with wildcard processing of filenames in a BAT/CMD
 MT> file, which =IMHO= is a better example of "proper" top-down than any
 MT> specific approach of any specific tosser. :)

Agreed.

 MT> While I'm not prepared
 MT> to install/extensively test to confirm my suspicions, I suspect that
 MT> the Confmail approach would also be more susceptible to concurrency
 MT> issues then the Squish approach with multiple LAN nodes manipulating
 MT> outbound at the same time.

Hmm..?

 MT> At minimum it means that Squish may get
 MT> work done in the same run that wouldn't get done until a subsequent
 MT> run with the Confmail approach.

What does Confmail has to do with Squish (something i might have missed).

Regards,
Bo

.... It's nice to be important but it's more important to be nice!
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5
 * Origin: The Night Express, Roennede DK (2:236/100)

.