Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 11:36:52 +0100 From: "Ben C. O. Grimm" <Ben.Grimm@wirehub.net> To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Comments / thoughts on nntpcache Message-ID: <fll44sksisa7fcavma4qbhhauncksd23et@smtp.wirehub.nl> In-Reply-To: <383EA45F.BD29D28@eclipse.net.uk.newsgate.clinet.fi> References: <FNEMIHIFMKFBMDBKFDPBMEDPCAAA.st@i-plus.net> <383E7BB2.A148E293@premier-networks.com> <383EA45F.BD29D28@eclipse.net.uk.newsgate.clinet.fi>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26 Nov 1999 17:16:36 +0200, Stuart Henderson <sh@eclipse.net.uk> wrote: > > We ran it at an ISP I used to work at and it puked there as well.. the > > cache directory would never purge itself automatically... we had to go > > in and manually destroy the cache directory about once a day... > > There's a signal you can send it to ask it to expire. > Split it over ports and then you can expire binaries differently. That would be nntpcached -e. With a properly configured nntpcache, you would never have a need for this. The only thing that would help when an expire runs at very slow speeds is to HUP the main nntpcached process. Don't know why, but it helps sometimes. Oh, and don't run nntpcached -e standalone. It's much faster when the nntpcache daemon itself is running as well. -- - Ben C. O. Grimm ----------------- Ben.Grimm@wirehub.net - - Wirehub! Internet Engineering - http://www.wirehub.net/ - - Wirehub! Backbone --- http://doema.wirehub.net/wirehub/ - - Private Ponderings ------- http://libertas.wirehub.net/ - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fll44sksisa7fcavma4qbhhauncksd23et>