Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 15:24:20 +0100 From: Paul Mather <paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> To: Benjamin Lutz <benlutz@datacomm.ch> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: portsnap mirror servers Message-ID: <1145629460.3188.27.camel@dell8600.dlib.vt.edu> In-Reply-To: <200604211440.28535.benlutz@datacomm.ch> References: <3aaaa3a0604171743y33af6355udf750eca65605920@mail.gmail.com> <44456BC2.1050102@freebsd.org> <200604211440.28535.benlutz@datacomm.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 14:40 +0200, Benjamin Lutz wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 April 2006 00:44, Colin Percival wrote:
> > I have a list of people who have offered mirrors, but so far I haven't
> > seen any need for additional mirrors -- the two which already exist are
> > showing no signs of slowing down.
>
> Hm, but I see a quite noticeable speed difference between portsnap1 and
> portsnap2. The second one is quite a bit faster.
I notice that on 4.x portsnap never finds any mirrors because the grep
of the output returned by "host -t srv ..." is not appropriate for 4.x's
version of /usr/bin/host, which produces output different to that of 5.x
onwards (a BIND8 vs BIND9 issue, I guess). So, maybe because of this,
all of the portsnaps running on 4.x machines are hitting the same server
each time instead of randomly choosing a mirror, thereby causing that
mirror to be a bit more loaded?
Cheers,
Paul.
--
e-mail: paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu
"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production
deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
--- Frank Vincent Zappa
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1145629460.3188.27.camel>