SABnzbd Forums

I am confused about configuring multiple servers. I don't quite understand the whole "Backup" and "Optional" options.

I have Astraweb and Supernews. Both are configured as primary (in that neither is a "Backup" or "Optional"). It appears that when downloading, SAB grabs articles from both servers simultaneously. Great. My question is that if an article is "Not found" on Astraweb, will SAB try Supernews (and visa-versa) when they're both primary? Will SAB flip-flop between primary servers looking for missing articles or will it only try "Backup" servers for missing articles?

I don't care which server an article comes from, I just want to be sure that if SAB can't get it from one, then it will try all others, primaries and backup.

Lastly, if I configure the EU Astraweb server as a third server and would like it to be used ONLY if neither the US Astraweb nor Supernews has an article (as a last chance, per say), should I configure it as a "Backup" server? Is that correct? Basically it should never be used unless the primary (or primaries) do not have an article. This same theory follows for additional servers added in the future - flag them as "Backup" servers and they are only used if the primaries are missing articles. Is that correct?

Thanks

Primary servers are used when they have a slot free.
If one server has an article the other won't be tried.
If a primary server misses an article, the other primary is asked.
Backup servers are only used when no primary has the article.
Optional servers are ignored for 10 minutes when they cause too many timeouts.

Perfect, that makes sense. Thanks.

That is what the wiki should say. Between the description and the 2 footnotes, it's confusing

Done

shypike wrote:Primary servers are used when they have a slot free.
If one server has an article the other won't be tried.
If a primary server misses an article, the other primary is asked.
Backup servers are only used when no primary has the article.
Optional servers are ignored for 10 minutes when they cause too many timeouts.

Yes, this is much more clear, at least in regard to primary servers. But what about multiple backup servers? I have a cheaper and more expensive backup. How does Sabnzbd pick which to ask when all primaries report not having an article? I know user controlled server priority is on the roadmap (way down the road), I just want to understand how things work now.

Thanks!

The backup servers form a single pool.
They're all tried, the fastest one gets the most traffic.
ForI the future, a more elaborate schema has been planned, but don't hold your breath.

shypike wrote:The backup servers form a single pool.
They're all tried, the fastest one gets the most traffic.
ForI the future, a more elaborate schema has been planned, but don't hold your breath.

Ah, well of course, it works just like the primaries. So, I guess it is best to leave my more expensive backup not enabled until I really need it.

Thanks.

Another option that works for some is assign 1 connection to the most expensive backup server and a high number of connections to your other backup servers. This means all servers will still be available but the server with 1 connection will hardly get used. Monitor how much is used on the servers page to see if acceptable.

Sorry to dig out this old thread, but wanted to check something.

With the above logic in place, are we better off having 2 primary servers and 1 backup server, as the primary servers are seen as two separate providers (it checks one after the other for missing articles), but the backup servers are seen as 1 pooled server so no logic of checking one then the other if 2?

Does that make sense?

The primary servers are one pool, the backup servers another.
Within each pool a "random" server is selected for an article.
A second server is selected if the first one doesn't have the article.
The backup pool is only used when the none of the servers has the article.

So do multiple primary servers and multiple backup servers work in the same way?

For example, if there were two of each, would the following happen;

1. P1 finds the article, grabs it, nothing else is done
2. P1 doesn't find the article, but P2 does, so that grabs it?

Although they're part of the same pool, do they also work independently in the way they look for articles? So regardless of P1 or P2, they look individually for articles rather than as soon as one can't find the article, the second one doesn't even try and it's passed straight to the backups?

I guess for the backups, the same questions, obviously knowing that they are the second pool.

Sorry to be going over this again, but really trying to understand how it works before committing to providers and account types.

Thanks.

That's the way it works.
With this addition: the first free slot of a server (if any) is picked.
It will look like SABnzbd picks a random server for each article.
Suppose Server 1 is twice as fast as Server 2, then Server 1 will handle about 66% of the load and Server 2 33%.

Can you achieve better download speeds if you have 2 servers? I currently use usenetserver but am only getting a fraction of my total download bandwidth. I was wondering if I could double my download speed by using a second source such as giganews or some other provider.

boe wrote:Can you achieve better download speeds if you have 2 servers?

Only if the newsserver (newsserver plan) is the bottleneck. And not your system, your own connection, or your ISP.

You seem to use TWC, so probably TWC is your bottle neck aka "throttle neck".

Thank you. I think I might as well add a second (just buy a 1 month subscription to another provider) Is there anything special I should know about adding the second server in Sabnzbd to achieve as much throughput from both as possible? Please forgive my ignorance as I'm really green when it comes to the whole newsgroups. I checked out Easynews and it looks like they have a cap at 150GB - that seems to be about 6 movies. I'd like to pick someone with unlimited bandwidth and downloads for a month and who isn't a reseller of my current services which is usenetserver so I'm not trying to tap the same well. Is supernews separate from usenetserver? I tried to go to their webpage but for some reason TWC seems to be blocking it in my area. I could get there from a client on FIOS. I checked my dns and it is resolving - tested with 2 different browsers.