-=PCTechTalk=- Re: Outlook Express Question
- From: "DSWabc" <dswabc@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:40:54 -0500
I found this in an msnews newsgroup. Similar problem but I don't think the
replies address the problem we've been discussing.
http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.aspx?query=wrong+account+is+used+for+replies&dg=microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6_outlookexpress&cat=en_US_1af493e1-1831-4a23-a891-078634d05944&lang=en&cr=US&pt=&catlist=&dglist=&ptlist=&exp=&sloc=en-us
If broken try:
http://tinyurl.com/25kcxu
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: "GMan" <gman.pctt@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 10:50 PM
Subject: -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Outlook Express Question
> See my interjections below.
>
> Peace,
> GMan
>
> "The only dumb questions are the ones we fail to ask!"
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "DSWabc" <dswabc@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 1:04 AM
> Subject: -=PCTechTalk=- Re: Outlook Express Question
>
>
>> Sorry to disappoint you but there was nothing to hate in your reply.
>> :-))
>>
>
> Actually, I started out my reply going in a different direction than what
> you eventually got to read. I ended up hating the first draft, so it was
> scrapped in favor of the one you did see. lol
>
>
>> I used a bad phrase... when I said "lasts a little while and then goes
>> away", I meant that the correct condition(s) exist long enough to cause
>> the
>> problem to a few messages and then the condition(s) stop existing and no
>> further damage is done. Until next time.
>
> Yes, I misunderstood you (or your wording threw me off). Either way, this
> is exactly the experience I have had on at least 3 occasions. I do not
> believe it happened during an OE session, however. It revealed itself
> after
> firing up the app and trying to reply to certain posts. I cannot be sure
> if
> any of those posts had just come in diring that particular session, but I
> do
> know that it occured with messages that were downloaded during a previous
> session.
>
>> Has there been a next time?
>
> As I mentioned above, this has happened to me at least 3 times over a 6 or
> 7
> year period and spanning different major OE versions (not exactly sure
> which
> of 3.x, 4.x, 5.x & 6.x).
>
>> I
>> did not mean to imply that the bad messages became good a few days later.
>> Sorry for the confusion.
>>
>> This is going back to the late 80s and my time spent playing with dBase
>> II,
>> III and IV (mostly II and III) and refers to the paragraph where you
>> discuss
>> data fragmentation within the dbx file. It includes some elementary info
>> that you probably already know to help others understand database files.
>>
>> A database file consists of one or more records. In our case a message
>> is
>> a
>> record. Each part of the message is a data field within the record. I
>> do
>> not know how OE separates the message into the separate data fields. It
>> might not and the record may consist of only one data field. (I'd love
>> to
>> find a utility or database program that would let me explore an OE dbx
>> file)
>
> I have used several things to look inside these files. If you have a
> small
> one with only a few messages in it, just open it up with WordPad to see
> the
> actual byte structure. You'll see that it is set up differently than your
> description of standard databases below. Unfortunately, I am unaware of
> any
> that will parse the entries into various data fields, although such a
> beast
> may, in fact, exist.
>
>>
>> When the first record is added to the file it is at the top of the file
>> (tof). If it is the only record it is also the end of the file (eof).
>>
>> Each time a record is added, it is appended to the end of the file. Each
>> time a record is deleted it is not really deleted. It is simply marked
>> for
>> deletion. So the record is still intact within the file. That means
>> there
>> is no empty space to write a part of a record to and then finish it in
>> another empty space somewhere. In other words, records within the file
>> do
>> not become fragmented like the file itself could be on the hard drive
>> surface. Thus there is no need for the dbx file to maintain an index.
>
> This idea deserves testing, but I do not have the time to conduct it
> tonight.
>
>>
>> Actual deletion happens when the file is compacted. At that time the
>> records marked for deletion are removed and the remaining records
>> re-written
>> to the file as we discussed in a previous message.
>>
>> I also wish you could remember which messages had this problem. It would
>> indeed be fun to experiment with moving messages into different folders
>> and
>> maybe back again oe even through a series of folders and end in the
>> deleted
>> file. It would also be interesting to see if there was any commonality
>> amongst the affected messages such as I suggested in an earlier message.
>> What if you forwarded the message to someone as an attachment, it was
>> replied to and then you replied again.
>>
>> I am going to try to write a brief desciption of this problem and post it
>> to
>> an OE newsgroup at MSnews. Maybe they know something we don't?
>
> Let me know if you receive anything new back from them. :O)
>
>>
>> Don
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------
Please remember to trim your replies (including this sentence and everything
below it) and adjust the subject line as necessary.
To unsubscribe or change your email settings:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
To contact only the PCTT Mod Squad, write to:
pctechtalk-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
