Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(August 1996)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Reply from Compuserve
From: Eric Thomas <ERIC @ VM . SE . LSOFT . COM>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 21:06:42 +0200
To: list-managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: Message of Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 from list-managers-owner @ GreatCircle . COM

On Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:06:37 +0200 Kjetil Torgrim Homme
<kjetilho @
 ifi .
 uio .
 no> said:

>[James C. Armstrong]
>
>|   The lists that I administer are intended for group discussions; by
>|   concensus of the members we feel that Reply-To is the best
>|   solution. Group replies, such as this message, result in some
>|   folks receiving multiple copies, since all too often people do not
>|   edit the To: line in headers
>
>It's a feature, especially on large lists with long distribution
>delays or digests. That way, a dialogue can have a quicker pace than
>the mailing list host can maintain.

Perhaps this made sense  a few years ago (and it would  still be a matter
of personal opinion),  but we're in 1996.  Today you can buy  a very fast
Internet server for not much money at  all. Now I'm not saying that there
aren't many sites where the boss  doesn't think upgrading the machines is
a good  idea and  where the mailing  list host still  needs 30-60  min to
process postings,  all I'm saying is  that this is changing  very quickly
and the many people who have a machine with a turnaround time of 1 minute
or less are going  to base their habits on the speed  of the machine they
are using,  and not  on problems that  may have existed  a few  years ago
before they upgraded. Here is the  kind of statistics you can expect with
previous generation equipment:

Total: 166,690 deliveries

+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+
|  Average delivery time   |     Max delivery time    | For...     |
+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+
|      3 sec       (00:03) |      8 sec       (00:08) | First 50%  |
|      5 sec       (00:05) |     13 sec       (00:13) | First 60%  |
|      6 sec       (00:06) |     21 sec       (00:21) | First 70%  |
|      8 sec       (00:08) |     26 sec       (00:26) | First 80%  |
|     11 sec       (00:11) |     35 sec       (00:35) | First 90%  |
|     12 sec       (00:12) |     55 sec       (00:55) | First 95%  |
|     13 sec       (00:13) |     72 sec       (01:12) | First 96%  |
|     14 sec       (00:14) |    130 sec       (02:10) | First 97%  |
|     17 sec       (00:17) |    785 sec       (13:05) | First 98%  |
|     27 sec       (00:27) |   1596 sec       (26:36) | First 99%  |
|    216 sec       (03:36) | 334125 sec (3d 20:48:45) | All (100%) |
+--------------------------+--------------------------+------------+

As  you can  see, half  of the  messages were  delivered in  less than  8
seconds.  The  average delivery  time,  setting  aside  the usual  1%  of
addresses for brain-dead  mail systems that support a grand  total of one
parallel  connection  or are  up  2  hours a  day,  is  27 seconds.  This
turbo-charged super-server  is a 133MHz  Pentium with 64M and  one drive.
This machine  also runs  a web  server from which  people can  browse the
archives and make searches. There are 123 lists ranging from a handful of
subscribers to 1,400 or so. It's  far from being the largest mailing list
site in  the world,  but it  can probably  handle the  needs of  99.x% of
existing mailing  list sites, and it's  really not much hardware  at all.
It's only a matter of time until most lists run on that kind of system. I
give it a year, perhaps two.

  Eric


Follow-Ups:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Reply from Compuserve
From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <kjetilho @ ifi . uio . no>
Next: Re: Reply from Compuserve
From: Gene Rackow <rackow @ mcs . anl . gov>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Reply from Compuserve
From: murr rhame <murr @ vnet . net>
Next: Re: Reply from Compuserve
From: Gene Rackow <rackow @ mcs . anl . gov>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com