Hi,   
      
   On 2016-10-31 13:26:38, mark lewis wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:   
     about: "DUPES!":   
      
    WV>> Dupes have by definition the same dupe-checksum as the original, so   
    WV>> storing them is useless!   
      
    ml> maybe to you but to another developer who may be doing other things than   
    ml> /just/ dupes, it may be needed or desired... don't be so square that your   
    ml> mind is closed to other possibilities and thought processes... perhaps   
    ml> someone is keeping count of duplicate MSGIDs and needing also to store the   
    ml> CRC/hash for each of them...   
      
   If the CRC/hash is the same, because it's a dupe, you don't have to store it   
   again.   
      
   If you want to keep count of duplicate MSGID's you store those, or just a   
   count of them. That's got little to do with dupe hash's...   
      
    ml> example: yesterday i saw two messages with exactly the same MSGID,   
    ml> header, time stamps, and what looks to be the exact same message   
    ml> body... the seenbys and paths were different yet HPT with its   
    ml> HASH+MSGID dupe checking missed seeing the second one as a dupe...   
    ml> both were back-to-back in my message base so it was easy to flip back   
    ml> and forth between them to try to see any differences... golded+'s   
    ml> [I]nfo showed that they were virtually identical but there looked to   
    ml> be one space character immediately after the MSGID that was in one   
    ml> post and not the other... now, get this, both MSGIDs, even though they   
    ml> are the same, are in the dupe database but with different hashes...   
      
   I fail to see what's your point here. They weren't dupes according to hpt, so   
   the different crc/hash's were stored.   
      
   Bye, Wilfred.   
      
      
   --- FMail-W32 1.73.1.23-B20161031   
    * Origin: Native IPv6 connectable node (2:280/464)