test

I thought I just sent a message that didn't go through, but it could
have been "operator error..."

Joe,

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> I thought I just sent a message that didn't go through, but it
> could have been "operator error..."

Just a general comment here: I have noticed *severe* lag times
between posting something and actually seeing it appear; a week or so
ago it took 12 hours or something.

Occasionally the load on the Yahoo servers must be quite big, so
don't expect to see a post appear automatically - it may take some
time...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/makemicromusic/topicId_9.html#21

> Joe,
>
> --- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
> > I thought I just sent a message that didn't go through, but it
> > could have been "operator error..."
>
> Just a general comment here: I have noticed *severe* lag times
> between posting something and actually seeing it appear; a week or
so
> ago it took 12 hours or something.
>
> Occasionally the load on the Yahoo servers must be quite big, so
> don't expect to see a post appear automatically - it may take some
> time...
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

Hi Jon...

I just noticed that it seemed longer for this list than for the other
lists.... I was wondering if it was somehow related to the fact that
it is a *new* list... Probably not, though. They seem kind of cyclic
to me... sometimes posts take longer on some lists than others, and
then the reverse.

Unlike astrology, I really think there would be a reason for all
that, if somebody could figure it out... unless it's so imbedded in
how the Internet works that *nobody* could figure it out.

Anyway, glad I didn't lose some of the longer posts that I thought
were gone...

best,

Joe

Joe,

{you wrote...}
>I just noticed that it seemed longer for this list than for the other
>lists.... I was wondering if it was somehow related to the fact that
>it is a *new* list... Probably not, though.

I don't believe it does. I believe it is traffic routing, which is entirely dependent on servers and routers, and there is a great possibility that the sites are spread to different server farms. There are things called load balancers that try and keep this to a minimum

OK, enough non-music talk from me...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., jpehrson@r... wrote:
/makemicromusic/topicId_9.html#22
Date: Wed Jul 25 2001

> --- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "Jon Szanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
>
> > Just a general comment here: I have noticed *severe* lag times
> > between posting something and actually seeing it appear; a week
> > or so ago it took 12 hours or something.
> >
> > Occasionally the load on the Yahoo servers must be quite big,
> > so don't expect to see a post appear automatically - it may
> > take some time...
>
>
> Unlike astrology, I really think there would be a reason for all
> that, if somebody could figure it out... unless it's so imbedded
> in how the Internet works that *nobody* could figure it out.

Apparently, it's the result of a worm called Code Red.
I don't know much about it, but John Chalmers mentioned in an
email to me that it apparently invaded the Yahoo network and
may also have been the source of my email problems over the
weekend. The people at AT&T told me that they did maintenance
on the line in San Diego on Friday night, but were not more
specific.

-monz

--- In MakeMicroMusic@y..., "monz" <joemonz@y...> wrote:
> Apparently, it's the result of a worm called Code Red.
> I don't know much about it, but John Chalmers mentioned in an
> email to me ...

Yep, it's been putting the hurt on a lot of places; from the Systems
Advisory from my ISP:

"Please be advised that we have seen performance degradation
consistent with the "Code-Red Worm". We are working diligently to
restore complete functionality of our web services. Please see
msnbc.com news coverage."

Pretty good that they point to msnbc, since NT servers are getting
hit the hardest. Again, enough non-music from me...

Mom