Having been through this recently at a site I help out on, I can attest that for us, the drop back to HTDig 3.1.6 (away from the 3.2.b4) was well worth the effort.
The indexing using v3.1.6 takes 4 minutes for this site. The indexing using v3.2.b4 took over 40 minutes. Using the new features for v3.2.b4 introduced some *interesting* and flaky behaviors. I ended up configuring it to not use any of the new features and that returned some stability (and let it work with Mailman), but it was still dog slow to index the site. The only advantage that we found to the new v3.2.b4 was that it's index files took up half the space of the v3.1.6 index files. The space was not a big deal to us. The speed was. It's interesting that Red Hat should push the beta out on a production release. I found it to be of less than production quality and highly recommend that you remove v3.2.b4 and install v3.1.6 of HTDig. Jon Carnes On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 19:53, Paul Kleeberg wrote: > At 11:19 PM +0000 2/8/03, Richard Barrett wrote: > >At 22:57 08/02/2003, Paul Kleeberg wrote: > >>Hooray! (And thank you) It works! ...but there is still a > >>troubling message... > >> > >> > >> htdig'ing archive of list: <listname> > >> /usr/bin/rundig: line 48: 1425 Aborted $BINDIR/htnotify $opts > >> Warning: > >> The following is a lengthly process, but it is run only > >> the first time you start ht://Dig. Initializing database... > >> Warning: > >> The following is a lengthly process, but it is run only > >> the first time you start ht://Dig. Initializing database... > >> htfuzzy: Unable to open word database /var/lib/htdig/db.words.db > >> > >>Still that odd error. Searching for the db.words.db file, I find: > >> > >> /var/mailman/archives/private/<listname>/htdig/db.words.db > >> /var/mailman/archives/private/<listname>/htdig/db.words.db_weakcmpr > >> > >>[...] > >> > >>Should I just live with the db.words.db issue? Will it matter? > > > >This may be an htdig version related issue. The testing I did was > >with the 'production' htdig 3.1.6; that's what I am running on my > >'production' system. On checking the htdig.org web site, htdig 3.2 > >still seems to be at beta status. But it appears from what you say > >that Redhat are including it as a 'production' RPM. > > Looking at the information page for htfuzzy > http://www.htdig.org/htfuzzy.html it appears it can be instructed to > use a specified configuration file instead of the default. I suspect > that would solve the above problem. It appears it uses htdig.conf > instead of the list-specific config files found in htdig-mailman > where "database_dir: /var/mailman/archives/private/<listname>/htdig" > > Just so you know, it is in the standard "everything" install of the > cheapest CD version of 8.0 but looking at the bottom of the search > result page on my newly htdigged site, I see: > > ht://Dig 3.2.0b4-20020505 > > Clearly beta. > > Paul > -- > Paul Kleeberg, M.D. O o [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Family Physicians' E-Net -+---+- Voice: 612-840-3744 > 5025 Mulcare Drive |_o_| Family Practice & > Columbia Heights, MN 55421 USA / \|/ \ Information Services > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Mailman-Users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users > Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py > Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ > > This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Unsubscribe or change your options at > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/jonc%40nc.rr.com ------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ This message was sent to: archive@jab.org Unsubscribe or change your options at http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
