At 10:04 AM -0600 3/15/02, Chris Devers wrote:
>On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Jerrad Pierce wrote:
>
>> Another thing to consider is this, the list is just really really big.
>
>Exactly -- which is why I was trying not to come off as complaining about
>it, but just adding a data point to show that it wasn't just the original
>poster's setup.
>
>Though, that said, I am curious [a] how many people are on the list (and
>how that number compares to other PM lists), and [b] where it's run from
>and on what kind of hardware etc (and, again, how that compares to other
>PM etc lists). It doesn't really bother me, but Boston.pm doees seem to
>have the longest lag time of any list I participate in. *...shrug...*
Boston.pm's a majordomo-run list, and the way Majordomo delivers mail
tends to exacerbate any delays in the system. There are ways to speed
it up, such as bulk_mailer (which is what I use on my lists), but
there'll always be some lag due to the way it's set up.
Newer list managers use a different style of delivery which is a lot
faster, but usually more abusive to the destination systems and
network. (Though that's much less of an issue these days, as
bandwidth and servers are more than adequate to handle loads of
e-mail)
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
