Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Alexander Levenetz 

Hello Wolfgang,


> BTW, that was the reason for my initial question. A OS level
> backup will always save deleted messages too unless you do a
> compress before. Sorry for not beeing verbose enough.

No problem. If I had known I would have understood :-)

> When I think about it: did somebody check how TB backup handles
> this? Are deleted messages still there after a restore?

It looks like it is doing a purge+compress as the file is only about
10% of the size of an unpurged/uncompressed TB-installation-folder.
But who knows...

Greetings,
Alexander

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Wolfgang Kynast 

Hi Alexander,

>> 'Purge' does the deletion of expired/excess messages according to
>> the folder settings. Compress, as you say, removes the messages
>> flagged as deleted and reclaims the space.

AL> That means: if I do not compress, I could also leave the messages in
AL> the folder as the space won't be reclaimed without compress anyway? I
AL> can hardly believe that...

You better do so :-)

BTW, that was the reason for my initial question. A OS level
backup will always save deleted messages too unless you do a
compress before. Sorry for not beeing verbose enough.

When I think about it: did somebody check how TB backup handles
this? Are deleted messages still there after a restore?

-- 
Regards,
Wolfgang

Co-moderator TBUDL / TBBETA discussion lists
writing without the moderator's hat on ;-)

Using The Bat! 1.49 under Windows 95 4.0 Build   B
in Stadtallendorf, Germany,
on a 166Mhz Cyrix, 128MB SDRAM, half SCSI system ;-)

http://www.wolfgang-kynast.de/

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Ming-Li 

On Friday, February 23, 2001, 6:54:32 AM, Alexander wrote:

> That means: if I do not compress, I could also leave the messages
> in the folder as the space won't be reclaimed without compress
> anyway? I can hardly believe that...

It's a typical database practice. It enables you to un-delete
deleted messages when necessary--until you compress the database
(message base in TB's case).

Please note that the "Purge all folders" command under the Folder
menu does in fact compress the folders after purge (delete old
messages). IOW, it's "Purge + Compress all folders".

-- 
Best regards,
Ming-Li

The Bat! 1.49e | Win2k SP1



-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Thomas 

Hallo Alexander,

On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 15:54:32 +0100 GMT (23/02/2001, 22:54 +0800 GMT),
Alexander Levenetz wrote:

>> 'Purge' does the deletion of expired/excess messages according to
>> the folder settings. Compress, as you say, removes the messages
>> flagged as deleted and reclaims the space.

AL> That means: if I do not compress, I could also leave the messages in
AL> the folder as the space won't be reclaimed without compress anyway? I
AL> can hardly believe that...

Believe it, 'tis the truth.

-- 

Cheers,
Thomas.

Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste.

-Work fascinates me. I could sit and watch it for hours. 

Message reply created with The Bat! 1.49f
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998 
using an Intel Celeron 366Mhz, 128MB RAM



-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Marck D. Pearlstone 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi Alexander,

On 23 February 2001 at  15:54:32 +0100 (which was 14:54 where I  live)
Alexander Levenetz wrote and made these points:

>> 'Purge' does the deletion of expired/excess messages according to
>> the folder settings. Compress, as you say, removes the messages
>> flagged as deleted and reclaims the space.

AL> That means: if I do not compress, I could also leave the messages in
AL> the folder as the space won't be reclaimed without compress anyway? I
AL> can hardly believe that...

Indeed - strange but true. A purge operation doesn't take long. A
compress operation can do. I think that it was an early design
decision to separate the functions. I have all of my folders
configured to do both on exit, so I never have to think about it.

- --
Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH
 
[ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com  ]
[Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs   ]

TB! v1.49e S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.8ckt
Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness

iQA/AwUBOpZ+SznkJKuSnc2gEQJyjwCfUCxseL1WS2eCTftsUKbY3lLQozIAniv4
Bhq4hQoIW/n7q0thnS6rozOd
=7Dq1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Alexander Levenetz 

Hello Marck,


> 'Purge' does the deletion of expired/excess messages according to
> the folder settings. Compress, as you say, removes the messages
> flagged as deleted and reclaims the space.

That means: if I do not compress, I could also leave the messages in
the folder as the space won't be reclaimed without compress anyway? I
can hardly believe that...

Greetings,
Alexander

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Marck D. Pearlstone 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi Marck,

On 23 February 2001 at  13:43:45 + (which was 13:43 where I  live)
Marck D. Pearlstone wrote and made these points:

TM>> Anyone more knowledgeable on TB! inner workings want to confirm/deny
TM>> that?

MDP> I will confirm the application of the terminology. That is the meaning
MDP> and function of those terms in the context of the TB Mail bases.

Sorry - I'm wrong. 'Purge' does the deletion of expired/excess
messages according to the folder settings. Compress, as you say,
removes the messages flagged as deleted and reclaims the space.

- --
Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH
 
[ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com  ]
[Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs   ]

TB! v1.49e S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.8ckt
Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness

iQA/AwUBOpZtbTnkJKuSnc2gEQJ0EQCgyDjO+ms/jxnjQYiXmVG6IiSKq4AAn1hw
8Qn6967zHeFIWSdSlLNf/wLM
=1dN6
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Marck D. Pearlstone 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Hi Tim,

On 23 February 2001 at  08:23:38 -0500 (which was 13:23 where I  live)
Tim Musson wrote and made these points:

TM> Anyone more knowledgeable on TB! inner workings want to confirm/deny
TM> that?

I will confirm the application of the terminology. That is the meaning
and function of those terms in the context of the TB Mail bases.

- --
Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH
 
[ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com  ]
[Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs   ]

TB! v1.49e S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGP 6.5.8ckt
Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness

iQA/AwUBOpZpEjnkJKuSnc2gEQIVjgCgyvdRvZW4fEPGtiNp4cJ/hsDcTUIAnRi9
pyI/FnCVimQpN492ZlFgdc0z
=NZU4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Alexander Levenetz 

Hello Tim,


> I'm not sure about TB!, but when I worked with databases (~1990),
> you did a purge (to remove all records that were marked "deleted"),

I would say = "remove old messages"?

> then in TB! case a compress to take all the "empty" space out of the
> db that is left when removing a record.

Shouldn't "remove old messages" in connection with "Keep messages in
the base for:" do that?

> Also, I would guess a re-index happens which would speed up access
> time.

I can't tell any difference. The only thing I _can_ say is that the
process of compressing the database takes some time which I consider
unnecessary under these circumstances.

> Anyone more knowledgeable on TB! inner workings want to confirm/deny
> that?

Yes, I would really be interested too.

Greetings,
Alexander

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Tim Musson 

Hey Alexander,

Friday, February 23, 2001, 5:26:40 AM, you wrote:

AL> I don't really see any advantage in compressing the folders
AL> besides the reduction of the folder-size. Or what else would there
AL> be? But I compressed the largest folders for you :-): it saved
AL> about 70 MB. If I would compress every folder it would probably
AL> save some 160 MB - not really that much.

I'm not sure about TB!, but when I worked with databases (~1990), you
did a purge (to remove all records that were marked "deleted"), then
in TB! case a compress to take all the "empty" space out of the db
that is left when removing a record. Also, I would guess a re-index
happens which would speed up access time.

Anyone more knowledgeable on TB! inner workings want to confirm/deny
that?

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! eMail v1.49
Windows NT 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 1)
I have an imaginary friend who refuses to play with me.



Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary
-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Wolfgang Kynast 

Hi Alexander,

...
AL> If I would compress every folder it would probably save some 160
AL> MB - not really that much.

It would shrink your W2K backup to ~640 MB :-)

-- 
Regards,
Wolfgang

Co-moderator TBUDL / TBBETA discussion lists
writing without the moderator's hat on ;-)

Using The Bat! 1.49 under Windows 95 4.0 Build   B
in Stadtallendorf, Germany,
on a 166Mhz Cyrix, 128MB SDRAM, half SCSI system ;-)

http://www.wolfgang-kynast.de/

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Alexander Levenetz 

Hi Wolfgang,


AL>> I was just wondering: my TB!-folder is 700 MB.

> Are you aware of the way TB handles deleted mails in it's database?

Yes, I would say I know that. But I currently have about 12500 Mails
of which the ones in most of the folders are automatically deleted
after a certain time (such as the ones in the trash-folder, e.g.), and
I actually (still) have enough space on my hard-drive/partition.

I used compression before but that (of course) makes TB! work for a
while to compress the database. I don't want to wait that long, and I
don't really see any advantage in compressing the folders besides the
reduction of the folder-size. Or what else would there be?
But I compressed the largest folders for you :-): it saved about 70
MB. If I would compress every folder it would probably save some 160
MB - not really that much.

Greetings,
Alexander

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-23 Thread Wolfgang Kynast 

Hi Alexander,

AL> I was just wondering: my TB!-folder is 700 MB.

Are you aware of the way TB handles deleted mails in it's
database? Do a folder | compress all and see how much freed
space is reported.

-- 
Regards,
Wolfgang

Co-moderator TBUDL / TBBETA discussion lists
writing without the moderator's hat on ;-)

Using The Bat! 1.49 under Windows 95 4.0 Build   B
in Stadtallendorf, Germany,
on a 166Mhz Cyrix, 128MB SDRAM, half SCSI system ;-)

http://www.wolfgang-kynast.de/

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-22 Thread Tim Musson 

Hey Alexander,

Thursday, February 22, 2001, 4:33:17 AM, you wrote:

AL> And: registry information, by chance, is probably not backed up,
AL> right?
I believe it is.  I used TB! backup and restore when I went from WinNT
to W2k via an fdisk, and got everything back.

AL>  What exactly is contained in that registry information?
Not sure, but there are manual BU procedures floating around (check
the FAQ) and one of the steps is to save out the registry information.
You could save the reg info, and open the .reg file with a text editor
and look for yourself.


-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! eMail v1.49
Windows NT 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 1)
Why is it considered necessary to nail down the lid of a coffin?

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re: Question: Backup-function

2001-02-22 Thread Gary J. Toth 

AL> I was just wondering: my TB!-folder is 700 MB. When I use the
AL> Win2k backup I end up having pretty much 700 MB in a backup-file. I
AL> just used TB-Backup and had _everything_ backed up - and the file is only
AL> about 80 MB. Can that be? Was really everything backed up? Is the
AL> compression that good?

You have to bear in mind that the best compression results come from text files.
So, yes the compression is really that good.

AL> And: registry information, by chance, is probably not backed up,
AL> right? What exactly is contained in that registry information? For me
AL> is most important that the information about my folders and the
AL> filters is kept backed up somewhere as I just had to reinstall TB on a
AL> new System and was more lucky than smart to be able to use it the way
AL> I had it before... (create the folders manually, import message
AL> base...)

Can't answer this one.. sorry 8-)


/^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^\
You're never to old to be what you might have been.
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^
 Gary J. Toth, VNCP
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   http://armpit.tzo.com
  http://www.navetsusa.com/members/gtoth.html
  Louisville, Kentucky, USA
  Yahoo Messenger: gjtoth 
\v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v/



-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Question: Backup-function

2001-02-22 Thread Alexander Levenetz 

Hello everybody,


I was just wondering: my TB!-folder is 700 MB. When I use the
Win2k backup I end up having pretty much 700 MB in a backup-file. I
just used TB-Backup and had _everything_ backed up - and the file is only
about 80 MB. Can that be? Was really everything backed up? Is the
compression that good?
And: registry information, by chance, is probably not backed up,
right? What exactly is contained in that registry information? For me
is most important that the information about my folders and the
filters is kept backed up somewhere as I just had to reinstall TB on a
new System and was more lucky than smart to be able to use it the way
I had it before... (create the folders manually, import message
base...)

greetings,
Alexander
-- 
"The only people who keep 'welcome' messages are
the people who don't need them anyway."

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org