Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:53:18 -0800 (PST) From: John Polstra <stable@freebsd.org> To: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New US CVSup mirrors Message-ID: <200011220553.eAM5rIS77523@vashon.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <200011210142.UAA98400@sanson.reyes.somos.net> References: <200011210142.UAA98400@sanson.reyes.somos.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <200011210142.UAA98400@sanson.reyes.somos.net>, Francisco Reyes <fran@reyes.somos.net> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 09:27:21 -0500, Louis A. Mamakos wrote: > > >So, pick a "close" mirror (and note that in the US, 3 new ones were just > >added that are likely very underutilized) and move on to the next problem. > > That is basically ignoring the issue and sooner or later it will > come back to hunt us.. As the user base grows it will become > more and more critical to find better mechanisms to use > underutilized servers. And all of these bright ideas aren't helping a bit. Bright ideas are a dime a dozen. Even marketing people can come up with bright ideas. When somebody starts acting like an engineer, thinks through the issues all the way to the end in detail, writes down a detailed design, and builds a proof-of-concept implementation, I might take him seriously. I have explained the problems many times, and they're there in the archives for everyone to read. But no, reading them and understanding them would be too much work, wouldn't it? Much easier to just dash off an e-mail with a few unrefined and infeasible big ideas. Let somebody else do the hard part. Look, folks: all I tried to do in this thread was make you aware of some new CVSup mirrors that might make your lives easier. Use them or don't use them, as you see fit. If you like getting that "too busy" message, then by all means don't bother using the new mirrors. I won't lose any sleep over it. Reviving this same tired old discussion again and again doesn't accomplish a thing, except to make me a lot more hesitant to announce _anything_ to this list. > I tried two of the "new mirrors". One was too busy I seriously doubt that. Which one was it? What was the date and time, GMT? I bet the server logs won't support this claim. The new mirrors are hardly being used at all. I have yet to see more than 2 clients running on cvsup10 even though it has a limit of 20. > was too slow even though it is relatively close (hops wise). In > essense when new mirrors are added it is very possible that many > people may give them a try and may overwhelm them. It is also > possible that some of the previously existing sites made then be > underutilized. I have _never_ yet seen that happen. What happens is that nobody changes a thing. The new sites gradually start being utilized as _new_ users adopt them. Existing users, generally speaking, can't be bothered. Too bad for them. > I think the goal is in finding an intermediate point betwen > complexity and improvements. I still think there may be some > improvements if we had some type of serial indicator of a > mirror's last update. This just shows that you haven't bothered to read the previous discussions in the archives. There is no such thing as "the mirror's last update." How can that be, you ask? Read the archives and find out. :-) John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200011220553.eAM5rIS77523>