From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from mail-qk1-x72e.google.com (mail-qk1-x72e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 093F71F8C6 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 20:56:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk1-x72e.google.com with SMTP id a10so960077qka.12 for ; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 13:56:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=KayBkFBESB7uLDHcekaHHlIPcIipaOESXudY7wmeXRY=; b=N/cAzUJ6nS4wLS1vfi6PigNz9rpHvgfyjRZuC59b+JmgYbP05JFcb7LL3WD3HBYFK+ K5NzA5MaI1ISeL22AYjSoMam0UQwHkAF4uxrRm7TbHYh8JTodzBADPZgT0q+pkHVOBXO XFzapzmrKxpM1vwsa/PLQLEwIy3OKHdV0mvfU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=KayBkFBESB7uLDHcekaHHlIPcIipaOESXudY7wmeXRY=; b=lsPwGkhsSBmZaZCZwVJkSMwK2bT1+ZMlvK85jT9hF4yaG/UV1RNvQx/DuWB0zW9vb4 pz9Cm2A6WeyW7vkCg26k8C0pMdDBuiooS+o4KR67UQMb6jeKFz5K/jB195w4XyMkKzZH 81+eL5Cd9nZxsVXYYWGFxoHmJI5JD+U4eeTxv9ASpTiS6ppEaLl21wxdhhdoqcttinNx Z2blDp0B+RdIZQwwTzqcKjeN5IhyhHWI8BCrn/Zu2QeroDIrBYHOd/mdzkdRT3qh/lru CpLfzOKXBYkpv0mVhWjrB7xujHTWTwu/EyZNr5H7c1soWKQx/U4Fv0Lox0+oP9nhbc/2 NOhg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532FGaJ5GkgabYEa+36XNyi3w6xzodskr2h66MTipuCwoYrDNSFR BDrBKG/kW2eVCCIcor11Yvx9bQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzXnNU/dfjU0bDNmtpCBjY149uieLZqUVfcyyeYErq+97/SWIUbxO00CEqyXi1DmqrAWn4LHQ== X-Received: by 2002:a37:a2c6:: with SMTP id l189mr1600046qke.109.1630529795903; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 13:56:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from meerkat.local (bras-base-mtrlpq5031w-grc-32-216-209-220-181.dsl.bell.ca. [216.209.220.181]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e21sm625013qtg.40.2021.09.01.13.56.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 01 Sep 2021 13:56:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 16:56:34 -0400 From: Konstantin Ryabitsev To: Eric Wong Cc: meta@public-inbox.org Subject: Re: Is it safe to round-robin the nntp server? Message-ID: <20210901205634.guu4p7jyty3ec7qe@meerkat.local> References: <20210901203022.lmyudbbouxzt5rfr@meerkat.local> <20210901205413.GA11375@dcvr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210901205413.GA11375@dcvr> List-Id: On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 08:54:13PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote: > > With lore.kernel.org now 3 different nodes with failover, I'm curious if it's > > safe to point the NNTP server at that as well. I'm assuming that article > > numbers are going to be the same across all three systems, but I wanted to > > double-check that it's the case. I.e., if node1 goes down and DNS shifts to > > point at node2, will that mess up nntp access, or is that okay? What about > > imap? > > Likely, it depends on how picky NNTP clients are. The one thing > that could differ is the "created_at" field in msgmap.sqlite3. > > created_at probably affects IMAP more (UIDVALIDITY), though; and > I know some IMAP synchronization tools get picky about that. Is that value taken from git repos, or generated during indexing? All 3 nodes replicating from the same set of sources, but they do indeed run the index hooks at slightly different times. -K