Re: stats 2024

On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:32:39 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The
Doctor) wrote:

In article <l71onjl3l9s645cocfartgo1ktqpbtg0tc@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 01:42:14 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The
Doctor) wrote:
>

In article <vleq48$16l63$1@dont-email.me>,
Bobbie Sellers  <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

On 1/5/25 11:26, The Doctor wrote:

In article <84dlnj1m6uanfl6cto5ptdiilop3ocpr1t@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 03:15:59 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The
Doctor) wrote:
>

In article <67798b99.2022134875@127.0.0.1>, Bice

<eichler2@comcast.net> wrote:

On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 14:16:42 -0500, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>

On 1/2/2025 11:47 AM, Paul S Person wrote:

>
I found this interesting bit:
>
***** Users with highest total size of messages *****
   num| Name                        | size       | Nb Msg | or. | %
>

>

----|-----------------------------|------------|--------|-----|------------------|

    1 |                             | 16,422,887 |  6,002 | 705

| 64.93%

xxxxxxxxxx
    2 | Paul S Person               |  1,114,057 |    315 |   0

|  4.40%

    3 | Lynn McGuire                |    928,572 |    341 |  98

|  3.67%

    4 | D                           |    852,999 |    247 |   3

|  3.37%

>
Is the first line, perhaps, a total line? With the "xxxxxxxxxx"
intended to show where the actual list begins?

>
That is certainly my take on it. It seemed obvious.

>
I'm wondering if all the "uncounted" messages (like my missing 11
posts and those of other people whose totals look suspiciously low)
got lumped together into that #1 no-name entry at the top.
>
If you add up all the numbers of posts by named posters, the total
only comes out to 3,038, not 6,002.
>
If the post total was really 3,038, that works out to an average of
just over 8 posts a day, which seems low.  If you add 6,002 to the
3,038, that give an average of around 25 posts a day, which seems like
a more reasonable number.
>
So I'm going with that nameless first line as being the total of all
the "unclaimed" posts.
>
Yeah, I'm a bored computer programmer on vacataion, how could you
tell?
>
  -- Bob
>

>
Could be the CPU just could not handle such a large input.

>
Well, that's what you get when you try to do this stuff on an 8008
with scant memory and no hard drive.
>
Alternately, we could always blame Linux ...

 
Yet AMD 64-bit CPUs...

>
You can blame GNUlinux for my postings but not much else.
If CBM had remained in business you could blame AmigaOS.
>

 

--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

>
>
bliss- Dell Precision 7730- PCLOS 2025.01- Linux 6.6.69- Plasma 5.27.11
>

>
But I was using MesNews on Win10 on an Asus X555 .

>
The only time my computers have been overwhelmed is when Windows 10
was running it's own heavy-duty programs and hogging the CPU. I found
opening Task Manager to be both informative and helpful in getting
Windows 10 to back off. At least for a while.
>
And, anyway, I don't think r.a.s.w is busy enough to overwhelm a
modern processor.

>
There are different levels of processors.

I don't think the 8088 in my Tandy 1000TX would be overwhelmed by the
amount of data involved. It would take it a while to process it, to be
sure, but the job would get done.

Given properly-written software, of course. I once tried a
3rd-party-program update where every mouse click produced a Magical
Mystery Tour of the program. Why was and will, no doubt, remain
forever unclear, for 8088 computers [1] are, surely, rather rare these
days.

[1] I don't want to hear about checkout stand keypads, ATMs, and other
similar single-purpose devices. Even if they use 8088s.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"