OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
in [Outlook Express]
|
Prev: Error code 0x800CCC0E & 0X8000CCC78
Next: errore
From: Neil on 30 Jan 2009 17:06 "VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message news:glvepv$8ju$1(a)news.motzarella.org... > Neil wrote: > >> "VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message >> news:glu9j6$ph5$1(a)news.motzarella.org... >>> Bruce Hagen wrote: >>> >>>> News servers only keep posts for a period of time. Each server is >>>> different. >>>> MSNews keeps them for 90 days. Some servers keep them longer, some only >>>> for >>>> a few days. >>>> >>>> If you want to keep posts indefinitely, copy them to an OE local >>>> folder. >>>> >>>> Also, make sure that in View | Current View, you have Show All Messages >>>> and >>>> Group messages By Conversation checked and nothing else. >>> >>> The reason regarding Bruce's reply is that OE remains in sync with the >>> NNTP server. If the NNTP server expires and drops a post then so, too, >>> will OE. You need to move items out of the newsgroups folder in OE if >>> you don't want them to get synchronized (i.e., deleted in OE after the >>> NNTP server deleted them). >> >> Again, I have my synchronization settings set to "No synchronization." >> And I >> remember my headers used to stay indefinitely. Once a header was >> downloaded, >> it would just stay in the folder. If I hadn't gotten the body of a >> message, >> and it scrolled off the server, then, yeah, it was too late (and when I >> tried to get that expired text, OE would show the header in strikethrough >> text; but the header would still be there). >> >> So what's the point of having a synchronization setting of "no >> synchronization" if OE is going to synchronize anyway? Doesn't make >> sense. >> And, like I said, didn't used to be that way. I remember a point where OE >> would keep downloaded headers indefinitely. >> >> Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days after >> being >> downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them anyway, regardless of the >> setting. Again, doesn't make sense. > > The "synchronization" you mention only relates to reading posts while OE > is offline. It determines if OE is going to retrieve nothing new, just > headers for new posts, or the headers and bodies of new posts. You can > then put OE offline to read them (or read them while you are > disconnected from the network). That is NOT the synchronization that I > spoke of which is OE keeping in sync with what posts are currently > available on the server. > > If OE gets out of sync, you will see articles listed in OE but when you > try to read them you get "message no longer available on server" error. > That is because the server expired the article and removed it. Yes, I understand that. I've gotten that many times. No problem. I don't expect to be able to get messages that are no longer available. What I'm saying is: AFTER a message body is ALREADY downloaded, it shouldn't be deleted from my hard drive without my permission. > There is > an overview headers database that gets updated at intervals, like maybe > just once per day, but the article expire during the day. That means > the overview database and the article database can get out of sync. You > end up with "bad article number" errors when your newsreader tries > retrieve an article that was found in the overview database (when you > retrieved just headers) but the article no longer exists in the article > database. When the overview database gets updated then it is in sync > with the article database. That's another type of synchronization > problem. When an article is removed from the server, and after the > overview database gets updated to get in sync with the articles, then OE > uses the overview headers to figure out when an article is no longer > available on the server, and then OE syncs itself. That's the sync that > I was talking about. All I know is that I used to download headers, and headers would stay in the newsgroup folder. I would download message bodies, and they would stay in the folder as well. (Or, more precisely, in the DBX.) There was never a problem with messages that were already downloaded. OE was able to just keep them on the hard drive, and add to them as new messages became available. Then there came a point where OE changed and started deleting old messages and headers. But it didn't used to do that. So whatever your reason is that OE has to delete old messages and headers, I say: no it doesn't. It used to not do that, and there's no reason to do it. > > The sync you were talking about has nothing to do with staying in sync > with the server. It has to do with reading articles while offline. > "Synchronization" covers many different types of synchronization. Maybe > "cache headers or articles or both for offline reading" would have been > a better description albeit much longer description for the > "Synchronization" option in OE. Many users had or still have to pay by > the minute of connect time on a dial-up connection. They don't want to > waste time wandering around dozens of newsgroups hunting down the > articles they want to read and then retrieving them and then disconnect > to reduce their cost (which is the minutes deducted from their monthly > quota). Instead then have OE retrieve all headers and bodies for all > posts in all the newsgroups they visit (or maybe use rules to find just > particular posts). It often takes less time to do that so less minutes > are deducted from the user's connect time quota. > > Regardless of your "synchronization" settings in OE (which have to do > with retrieving the headers and bodies so they are available even when > offline), OE will synchronize what articles it keeps with those that are > still available on the server whenever you connect OE to the server. And that's what I'm saying is wrong. And OE used to not do that. And it was fine. If something is downloaded to my hard drive, it should stay there. > So > despite you caching a local copy to read off- or online, it will > disappear from OE if it disappears from the server. That's why you need > to move the articles to a different "holding" folder that is not the > newsgroups folder that syncs with the server. You break the sync link > so the article remains in that holding folder. Again, I shouldn't have to do that. And OE didn't previously require that. It's a ridiculous thing. Gonna start looking into other newsgroup readers.
From: Doug W. on 30 Jan 2009 17:29 Neil: I don't have the problem you describe, perhaps you should re-check ALL of your OE settings and start over from scratch. --- "Neil" <nrgins(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:TJKgl.19990$ZP4.5929(a)nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com... > > "VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message > news:glvf19$av4$1(a)news.motzarella.org... >> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote: >> >>> Devil's Advocate: If posts were not removed from OE (in its >>> current design >>> state) when they were removed from the server and a heavy >>> newsgroup user >>> never deleted any posts manually, consider how bloated and >>> ripe for >>> corruption the message store would become over time! >> >> How true. There is still the 2GB maximum file size for the >> .dbx files >> used by OE. That means you cannot store more than 2GB worth >> of headers >> and bodies in a .dbx file for a newsgroup. Exceeding that >> threshold >> results in a corrupted .dbx file. So with NNTP servers with >> extreme >> retention intervals and with a user that downloads all >> headers and also >> all their bodies then it becomes more likely the 2GB >> threshold gets >> exceeded. >> > > So you're saying that the software isn't intelligent enough to > just say: "Hey, you've reached the limit. Can't download > anymore. Would you like me to clear some messages for you"? > Instead it has to automatically delete messages, just to avoid > the 2 GB limit??? Ridiculous! > > For what it's worth, all of my newsgroup DBXs are less than 10 > MB! Not even anywhere close to 2 GB!!!!! > > And, again, if it ever did come close, a simple message > prompting to delete old messages would be fine (similar to > what Windows does when your hard drive gets near capacity). > > >
From: D. Spencer Hines on 30 Jan 2009 18:03 This pogue obviously doesn't understand the architecture of Outlook Express, designed by Software Geniuses Of Their Day, within the hardware constraints they faced -- which has already been explained here. Matthew 7:6. D. Spencer Hines Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum "Neil" <nrgins(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:GEKgl.19988$ZP4.4561(a)nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com... > > But as a newsgroup user, I'd like to be able to have messages that I've > already stored on my harddrive remain on my harddrive, rather than having > them deleted against my will by the software. If bloat is a problem, then > let ME manage it. Don't force me to have my messages deleted simply > because you're connecting to the server, for crying out loud.
From: D. Spencer Hines on 30 Jan 2009 19:55 "Neil" <nrgins(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:6TKgl.19992$ZP4.18041(a)nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com... > So Microsoft is right to FORCE me to keep Outlook Express Lean & Mean and > not give me a choice? They're right to force me to have to move every > message I want to save into new folders or have them be deleted against my > will? They're right to delete things from my hard drive even when I tell > them not to?... > Gonna start looking into other newsgroup readers. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This rampant, peripatetic, poltroonish pogue should have done that long ago... Forte Agent is a much more powerful newsreader than Outlook Express has ever pretended to be. He should look at it posthaste, without letting the swinging saloon doors of this newsgroup clip him in the tuchis on his way out. But instead of doing that he prefers to lob hand grenades at Microsoft on matters wherein they have NOT ERRED, rather on matters where they HAVE erred.. Said pogue thereby exhibits traits of very poor judgment, righteous conviction and unrelenting ZEAL -- the very worst possible traits, joined in pernicious and flatulent combination. He is too thick to understand that Outlook Express was designed to particular requirements existing at the time and place in the space-time continuum when it was conceived and designed by Software Geniuses Of Their Day [SOGOTD]. "Neil" obviously doesn't have a noodle capable of understanding the architecture of Outlook Express and its capabilities and limitations -- driven in large part by hardware constraints and cost-benefit analyses extant at the time of its conception and development. He clearly is a boy, in temperament, character and maturity, even if not in age -- and is probably a pimply-face teenager -- high on too much Ritalin, paint fumes and cleaning fluid. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." ---- William Shakespeare [1564-1616] The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Act I, Scene V, Line 166-167 Matthew 7:6 -- DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor Deus Vult
From: Gerry on 30 Jan 2009 20:13
Neil wrote: > > Yes, I understand that. I've gotten that many times. No problem. I > don't expect to be able to get messages that are no longer available. > > What I'm saying is: AFTER a message body is ALREADY downloaded, it > shouldn't be deleted from my hard drive without my permission. > It has always been that way. It is not going to change! > > All I know is that I used to download headers, and headers would stay > in the newsgroup folder. Not if they had expired on the server! >I would download message bodies, and they > would stay in the folder as well. (Or, more precisely, in the DBX.) Not if they had expired on the server! > There was never a problem with messages that were already downloaded. > OE was able to just keep them on the hard drive, and add to them as > new messages became available. Not if they had expired on the server! > > Then there came a point where OE changed and started deleting old > messages and headers. But it didn't used to do that. If there ever was a change it was before OE4 i.e before 1999. > > So whatever your reason is that OE has to delete old messages and > headers, I say: no it doesn't. It used to not do that, and there's no > reason to do it. > > And that's what I'm saying is wrong. And OE used to not do that. And > it was fine. Microsoft are not going to change the existing state of affairs. > > If something is downloaded to my hard drive, it should stay there. > > > Again, I shouldn't have to do that. And OE didn't previously require > that. It's a ridiculous thing. That's the way it is. Move or lose! > > Gonna start looking into other newsgroup readers. If you update from Windows XP you will have to do that anyway. -- Hope this helps. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |