newsbin.com

Hi guys. Can you explain how collapsed header names are created and the files listed underneath?First I am using 6.01b1 - 1127 on XPsp3.

Looking at internet search I find 3 compacted headers for a file:
1) filename.part001.rar has parts filename.part001.rar through filename.part223.rar
2) filename.part177.rar has parts filename.part177.rar, then jumps to filename.part122 through
filename.part448.rar and a couple of pars.
3) filename.part223.rar has parts filename.part223.rar through filename.part396.rar.

There are an large number of duplicates between header 2 and 3. One duplicate between header 1 and 2.

This is leading up to the real problem I am having which is a group of headers go missing if I look at the files from the group window. First I see only two collapsed header names and individual headers filename.part001.rar-filename.part096.rar are missing. So I come up short. I have no filters turned on at the moment. I thought well maybe somethings has gone bad with the group. It is small so I purged the headers and downloaded again. Same problem.

Your help is always appreciated and like the upgrade very much.

Cheers

meerkat

Can you PM me the exact filenames so I can look into it?

The files were posted over a period of 6 days. The compaction algorithm has a time element in it to avoid over-compaction of re-posts or similarly named posts. It is very rare to see rar sets that take more than a couple of days to post. We'll have to think about it.

At least you have an explanation though, you should be able to still download the set, you'll just have to queue up each compacted line separately.

If you queue the one with the pars first, Newsbin and autopar will do the rest.

dexter wrote:The files were posted over a period of 6 days. The compaction algorithm has a time element in it to avoid over-compaction of re-posts or similarly named posts. It is very rare to see rar sets that take more than a couple of days to post. We'll have to think about it.

Perhaps extend the allowed time if the deltas are small. If someone is slow-posting, it's more likely that he's posting some each day, not making a 3-day pause...

- mho

Dex and I were talking about your idea. It might be a good idea to slide the time window forward like you're suggesting. You can't depending on usenet timestamps for more than trending but, that along with a time window might be enough.