Date: Sat, 13 May 1995 15:37:28 -0700 From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM> To: Charles Henrich <henrich@crh.cl.msu.edu> Cc: freebsd-bugs@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: bin/402: w -n doesnt work as advertised. Message-ID: <199505132237.PAA00131@corbin.Root.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 13 May 95 18:30:25 EDT." <199505132233.PAA00451@Root.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> > I modified w.c to attempt to figure out the ip address of the hosts >> > that were non-IP. Because some folks might need an option to make w >> > not do any resolver lookups, I also added -l which mirrors the >> > the existing -n flag, and ensures no nameserver calls get executed. >> >> Actually, I strongly dislike the 4.4 "w" doing nameserver lookups by >> default. On any reasonable system that has > 20 users on it, it can take >> anywhere from several seconds to several minutes for the w output to finish. >> In my opinion, the default for w should be reverted back to the old behavior >> of trusting what is in wtmp. > >Must be a slow nameserver? Most local nameervers will cache all retrieved data >for an hour to a day, given that the responses should 80% of the time come from >your local nameserver. I never have any problems with the lookups, w never >takes even a second to run. This works if the nameserver for all the domains is currently reachable. If it isn't, it can take a minute for the query to timeout. About half the time I do a 'w' on freefall, it takes > 1 minute to complete because of this. In other cases, it's often that nameservers are slow to respond - 2 seconds isn't unusual for non-cached entries. If this happens with just a few of the users, the delay can approach 5-10 seconds. The problem grows as the number of users increases. It's extremely annoying. -DG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199505132237.PAA00131>