Rob Steinmetz wrote:
> I have one user who has gotten her mail to her notebook for several
> months. Her notebook was set to leave messages on our pop server.
>
> I discovered that the mail was not archived on our file server so I
> tried downloading her mail into her account to archive it.
>
> I noticed that the counter in Seamonkey was counting down the messages
> downloaded instead of counting them up.
>
> Seamonkey said downloading message 1 of 32567 and the 32567 counted down
> instead of the 1 counting up.
>
>
> I've tried this on two machine on Windows and one Linux both using
> different versions of Seamonkey with the same result.
>
> Other accounts on other machines using Seamonkey seem to work as expected.

Using View -> Sort on..., you can sort the list of messages up or down,
threaded or not, on any displayable field (including those that aren't
currently displayed). To have the most recently received message at
bottom, sort them Ascending by Order Received. To change which fields
are displayed, click the widget at far right of the column headings for
the message list pane.

Clicking one of the column headers will sort on that column (reversing
the sort if it's already sorted on that column) but it also has the
side-effect of suppressing threading.

For mail (including "Local Folders" which can also be used to save
newsposts), "order received" actually means (IIUC) "order arrived in the
present folder": if you move a message from one folder to another, it
will acquire an "order received" number after the latest message already
there. For news, of course, you cannot move a message from one newsgroup
to another.

Also for mail, I think the "order received" is actually the displacement
within the appropriate mailbox file, which explains why the numbers are
far from consecutive and why compacting may change them, bringing the
"oldest" message in each folder to order=zero and conserving the sequence.


Best regards,
Tony.
--
Canonical, adj.:
The usual or standard state or manner of something. A true
story: One Bob Sjoberg, new at the MIT AI Lab, expressed some
annoyance at the use of jargon. Over his loud objections, we made a
point of using jargon as much as possible in his presence, and
eventually it began to sink in. Finally, in one conversation, he used
the word "canonical" in jargon-like fashion without thinking.
Steele: "Aha! We've finally got you talking jargon too!"
Stallman: "What did he say?"
Steele: "He just used `canonical' in the canonical way."

Rob Steinmetz wrote:
> I have one user who has gotten her mail to her notebook for several
> months. Her notebook was set to leave messages on our pop server.
>
> I discovered that the mail was not archived on our file server so I
> tried downloading her mail into her account to archive it.
>
> I noticed that the counter in Seamonkey was counting down the messages
> downloaded instead of counting them up.
>
> Seamonkey said downloading message 1 of 32567 and the 32567 counted down
> instead of the 1 counting up.
>
>
> I've tried this on two machine on Windows and one Linux both using
> different versions of Seamonkey with the same result.
>
> Other accounts on other machines using Seamonkey seem to work as expected.

why yours is counting down I have no idea. Its supposed to
say downloading 5 of 300, then 6, then 7, and so forth.
Atleast thats they way mine does it.

All I can say is create a test profile and see if the
problem continues in that.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
Laws, which applies everywhere, except for some strange
reason, not to the mozilla.org servers, where you may get
banned.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm

Tony Mechelynck wrote:
> Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>> I have one user who has gotten her mail to her notebook for several
>> months. Her notebook was set to leave messages on our pop server.
>>
>> I discovered that the mail was not archived on our file server so I
>> tried downloading her mail into her account to archive it.
>>
>> I noticed that the counter in Seamonkey was counting down the messages
>> downloaded instead of counting them up.
>>
>> Seamonkey said downloading message 1 of 32567 and the 32567 counted down
>> instead of the 1 counting up.
>>
>>
>> I've tried this on two machine on Windows and one Linux both using
>> different versions of Seamonkey with the same result.
>>
>> Other accounts on other machines using Seamonkey seem to work as
>> expected.
>
> Using View -> Sort on..., you can sort the list of messages up or down,
> threaded or not, on any displayable field (including those that aren't
> currently displayed). To have the most recently received message at
> bottom, sort them Ascending by Order Received. To change which fields
> are displayed, click the widget at far right of the column headings for
> the message list pane.
>
> Clicking one of the column headers will sort on that column (reversing
> the sort if it's already sorted on that column) but it also has the
> side-effect of suppressing threading.
>
> For mail (including "Local Folders" which can also be used to save
> newsposts), "order received" actually means (IIUC) "order arrived in the
> present folder": if you move a message from one folder to another, it
> will acquire an "order received" number after the latest message already
> there. For news, of course, you cannot move a message from one newsgroup
> to another.
>
> Also for mail, I think the "order received" is actually the displacement
> within the appropriate mailbox file, which explains why the numbers are
> far from consecutive and why compacting may change them, bringing the
> "oldest" message in each folder to order=zero and conserving the sequence.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Tony.

Tony, I think you missed Rob's point. The way I read it, Rob is saying
the screen showed it was downloading message 1 of 32567, then 1 of
32566, then 1 of 32565, rather than 1 of 32567, 2 of 32567, 3 of 32567,
etc..

Daniel

Daniel wrote:
> Tony Mechelynck wrote:
>> Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>>> I have one user who has gotten her mail to her notebook for several
>>> months. Her notebook was set to leave messages on our pop server.
>>>
>>> I discovered that the mail was not archived on our file server so I
>>> tried downloading her mail into her account to archive it.
>>>
>>> I noticed that the counter in Seamonkey was counting down the messages
>>> downloaded instead of counting them up.
>>>
>>> Seamonkey said downloading message 1 of 32567 and the 32567 counted down
>>> instead of the 1 counting up.
>>>
>>>
>>> I've tried this on two machine on Windows and one Linux both using
>>> different versions of Seamonkey with the same result.
>>>
>>> Other accounts on other machines using Seamonkey seem to work as
>>> expected.
>>
>> Using View -> Sort on..., you can sort the list of messages up or
>> down, threaded or not, on any displayable field (including those that
>> aren't currently displayed). To have the most recently received
>> message at bottom, sort them Ascending by Order Received. To change
>> which fields are displayed, click the widget at far right of the
>> column headings for the message list pane.
>>
>> Clicking one of the column headers will sort on that column (reversing
>> the sort if it's already sorted on that column) but it also has the
>> side-effect of suppressing threading.
>>
>> For mail (including "Local Folders" which can also be used to save
>> newsposts), "order received" actually means (IIUC) "order arrived in
>> the present folder": if you move a message from one folder to another,
>> it will acquire an "order received" number after the latest message
>> already there. For news, of course, you cannot move a message from one
>> newsgroup to another.
>>
>> Also for mail, I think the "order received" is actually the
>> displacement within the appropriate mailbox file, which explains why
>> the numbers are far from consecutive and why compacting may change
>> them, bringing the "oldest" message in each folder to order=zero and
>> conserving the sequence.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Tony.
>
> Tony, I think you missed Rob's point. The way I read it, Rob is saying
> the screen showed it was downloading message 1 of 32567, then 1 of
> 32566, then 1 of 32565, rather than 1 of 32567, 2 of 32567, 3 of 32567,
> etc..
>
> Daniel
Exactly what is happening.

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
> Rob Steinmetz wrote:
>> I have one user who has gotten her mail to her notebook for several
>> months. Her notebook was set to leave messages on our pop server.
>>
>> I discovered that the mail was not archived on our file server so I
>> tried downloading her mail into her account to archive it.
>>
>> I noticed that the counter in Seamonkey was counting down the messages
>> downloaded instead of counting them up.
>>
>> Seamonkey said downloading message 1 of 32567 and the 32567 counted
>> down instead of the 1 counting up.
>>
>>
>> I've tried this on two machine on Windows and one Linux both using
>> different versions of Seamonkey with the same result.
>>
>> Other accounts on other machines using Seamonkey seem to work as
>> expected.
>
> why yours is counting down I have no idea. Its supposed to say
> downloading 5 of 300, then 6, then 7, and so forth. Atleast thats they
> way mine does it.
>
> All I can say is create a test profile and see if the problem continues
> in that.
>
I used two different machines with different profiles One of the
machines was Linux and one was Windows. The Linux machine was a new
install with a new profile.

Every other user works as you describe, even different users on the same
machine.

I wonder if it has something to do with the very large number of
messages, (more than 40,000).

rob wrote:

> I wonder if it has something to do with the very large number of
> messages, (more than 40,000).

it could be, but I really don't know.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
Laws, which applies everywhere, except for some strange
reason, not to the mozilla.org servers, where you may get
banned.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
> rob wrote:
>
>> I wonder if it has something to do with the very large number of
>> messages, (more than 40,000).
>
> it could be, but I really don't know.
>

as a test, create a test profile and see if the countdown
works in that or not.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
Laws, which applies everywhere, except for some strange
reason, not to the mozilla.org servers, where you may get
banned.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm

Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> rob wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder if it has something to do with the very large number of
>>> messages, (more than 40,000).
>>
>> it could be, but I really don't know.
>>
>
> as a test, create a test profile and see if the countdown works in that
> or not.

I think I explained above one of the machines I tried it on was a brand
new Seamonkey install on a new Linux install with no previous profile.
That is as good a test of the original profile as I can imagine. I don't
think the profile can be causing it.

rob wrote:
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>> rob wrote:
>>>
>>>> I wonder if it has something to do with the very large number of
>>>> messages, (more than 40,000).
>>>
>>> it could be, but I really don't know.
>>>
>>
>> as a test, create a test profile and see if the countdown works in
>> that or not.
>
> I think I explained above one of the machines I tried it on was a brand
> new Seamonkey install on a new Linux install with no previous profile.
> That is as good a test of the original profile as I can imagine. I don't
> think the profile can be causing it.

Here is just my idea about the problem.

I readed :
""Tony, I think you missed Rob's point. The way I read it, Rob is saying
the screen showed it was downloading message 1 of 32567, then 1 of
32566, then 1 of 32565, rather than 1 of 32567, 2 of 32567, 3 of 32567,
etc..
""

Did we speak about 32567 or about 32767 ?
Because that the maximum value of an integer 32767
If it's 32767, then the problem is that the number of messages on the
server.... could be not given correctly from the server .... or not
treated correctly by SM.

Ray_Net wrote:
> rob wrote:
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>> rob wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if it has something to do with the very large number of
>>>>> messages, (more than 40,000).
>>>>
>>>> it could be, but I really don't know.
>>>>
>>>
>>> as a test, create a test profile and see if the countdown works in
>>> that or not.
>>
>> I think I explained above one of the machines I tried it on was a
>> brand new Seamonkey install on a new Linux install with no previous
>> profile. That is as good a test of the original profile as I can
>> imagine. I don't think the profile can be causing it.
>
> Here is just my idea about the problem.
>
> I readed :
> ""Tony, I think you missed Rob's point. The way I read it, Rob is saying
> the screen showed it was downloading message 1 of 32567, then 1 of
> 32566, then 1 of 32565, rather than 1 of 32567, 2 of 32567, 3 of 32567,
> etc..
> ""
>
> Did we speak about 32567 or about 32767 ?
> Because that the maximum value of an integer 32767
> If it's 32767, then the problem is that the number of messages on the
> server.... could be not given correctly from the server .... or not
> treated correctly by SM.

The numbers are actually higher than 32565. I was wondering whether that
was causing a problem. I chose my example number poorly, the actual
number is greater than 40,000, but changes each time.

I suppose the server could be giving SeaMonkey wrong information. But
does the server or the client do the counting? I'm not sure how the
number of messages to be downloaded is calculated. I had imagined that
the server would tell the client the highest message number available
and the client would do the calculation from the last message number
downloaded. If that's right it seem the POP3 server is providing the
correct number but SeaMonkey isn't handling it correctly.

I do know that if you set SeaMonkey to leave messages on the server and
get the messages from two different clients the correct messages for
each client will be downloaded.

Daniel wrote:

> Tony, I think you missed Rob's point. The way I read it, Rob is saying
> the screen showed it was downloading message 1 of 32567, then 1 of
> 32566, then 1 of 32565, rather than 1 of 32567, 2 of 32567, 3 of 32567,
> etc..
>
Sorry if the following over-answers the question, the possible cause is
moderately technical, and without rooting in SM code may not be the
answer anyway (but I bet it is).

Note that each article has a Message-ID which is the same on all
servers, and an article number, which is the ordinal of articles seen in
a group. So the first article ever seen is called one, etc. Clients can
request by Message-ID or article number once in a group.

When a client requests entry to a group via the GROUP command, the
result is a status, the number of articles online, the lowest article
number, and the highest article number.

Ex:
200 Supernews server ready - posting allowed
GROUP news.groups
211 100000 449426 549425 news.groups group selected
GROUP alt.binaries.sounds.lossless.blues
211 76776 1652440 1729215 alt.binaries.sounds.lossless.blues group

Now this is when it gets interesting... there may be missing articles
between the lowest and highest. Three things cause this, articles being
deleted as spam, articles being canceled (on servers which honor
cancel), and articles expiring. Every article can have an optional
expiry date header, to make it last longer or expire sooner than the
default.

So if SM takes the difference between the lowest and highest article
numbers on line, and that's the 2nd (articles available) number you see,
every time you ask for an article and don't get it, SM can decrease the
2nd number, but leave the 1st number (count of article being requested)
at one.

It's not even that simple, SM keeps a list of what it has seen, so the
2nd number may be the difference between the highest number already seen
and the highest online. And if you haven't been looking at a group
recently the first unseen may now be lower than the lowest still online,
so if the count starts with "first unseen" it will go a long way to
reach the "oldest online" article.

So the short reason is "seamonkey is asking for articles no longer
available, and dropping the 2nd number which is the count of what *might
be* available."

I hope either the long or short explanation is useful. I spent over a
decade running news servers at national ISPs and "top 100" sites, and
sometimes get carried away with answers.

--
Bill Davidsen
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Now this is when it gets interesting... there may be missing articles
> between the lowest and highest. Three things cause this, articles being
> deleted as spam, articles being canceled (on servers which honor
> cancel), and articles expiring. Every article can have an optional
> expiry date header, to make it last longer or expire sooner than the
> default.

actually, there's a 4th reason. Some servers are refusing
postings from certain ISPs. For example, on a couple of
servers I'm on, they will not accept postings from
roadrunner or highwinds. On other servers I'm using, there
are those missing messages.

--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email
help!!!! Emails to me may become public

Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech
Laws, which applies everywhere, except for some strange
reason, not to the mozilla.org servers, where you may get
banned.

Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm

Thanks for the answer but my problem is a Mail Server I administer and
not a News Server. I understand that NTTP feeds can get messed up and
out of sync. I don't see how the SMTP message ID can get messed up,
since the message is delivered only to one server and the ID assigned by
the same server. I seriously doubt messages are missing, since I can
check to see if there are any and as far as I can see there aren't.

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Daniel wrote:
>
>> Tony, I think you missed Rob's point. The way I read it, Rob is saying
>> the screen showed it was downloading message 1 of 32567, then 1 of
>> 32566, then 1 of 32565, rather than 1 of 32567, 2 of 32567, 3 of
>> 32567, etc..
>>
> Sorry if the following over-answers the question, the possible cause is
> moderately technical, and without rooting in SM code may not be the
> answer anyway (but I bet it is).
>
> Note that each article has a Message-ID which is the same on all
> servers, and an article number, which is the ordinal of articles seen in
> a group. So the first article ever seen is called one, etc. Clients can
> request by Message-ID or article number once in a group.
>
> When a client requests entry to a group via the GROUP command, the
> result is a status, the number of articles online, the lowest article
> number, and the highest article number.
>
> Ex:
> 200 Supernews server ready - posting allowed
> GROUP news.groups
> 211 100000 449426 549425 news.groups group selected
> GROUP alt.binaries.sounds.lossless.blues
> 211 76776 1652440 1729215 alt.binaries.sounds.lossless.blues group
>
> Now this is when it gets interesting... there may be missing articles
> between the lowest and highest. Three things cause this, articles being
> deleted as spam, articles being canceled (on servers which honor
> cancel), and articles expiring. Every article can have an optional
> expiry date header, to make it last longer or expire sooner than the
> default.
>
> So if SM takes the difference between the lowest and highest article
> numbers on line, and that's the 2nd (articles available) number you see,
> every time you ask for an article and don't get it, SM can decrease the
> 2nd number, but leave the 1st number (count of article being requested)
> at one.
>
> It's not even that simple, SM keeps a list of what it has seen, so the
> 2nd number may be the difference between the highest number already seen
> and the highest online. And if you haven't been looking at a group
> recently the first unseen may now be lower than the lowest still online,
> so if the count starts with "first unseen" it will go a long way to
> reach the "oldest online" article.
>
> So the short reason is "seamonkey is asking for articles no longer
> available, and dropping the 2nd number which is the count of what *might
> be* available."
>
> I hope either the long or short explanation is useful. I spent over a
> decade running news servers at national ISPs and "top 100" sites, and
> sometimes get carried away with answers.
>