Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 20:13:51 +0200 From: Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem (again) with portsnap5.FreeBSD.org? Message-ID: <4CC082DF.2080203@madpilot.net> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinBbf8XkR445uj3Ku7vZB8ZHQOQypqL_zngjf7d@mail.gmail.com> References: <19264903.2523091287604404630.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> <20101020200247.GA60489@icarus.home.lan> <20101021083124.GA50114@megatron.madpilot.net> <20101021115121.282ecadb@gumby.homeunix.com> <AANLkTinBbf8XkR445uj3Ku7vZB8ZHQOQypqL_zngjf7d@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/21/10 18:17, Royce Williams wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 2:51 AM, RW<rwmaillists@googlemail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 10:31:24 +0200 Guido Falsi<mad@madpilot.net> wrote: >> >>> I have noticed on the machines I use/administer a bias towards >>> portsnap5. > >> If you define a cache environment variable the random choice is seeded >> by that to improve the caching. There may also be some weighting in the >> SRV record. > > Yep - update5 is currently weighted 50% in the SRV: > > $ host -t srv _http._tcp.update.freebsd.org > _http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 35 80 update4.FreeBSD.org. > _http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 50 80 update5.FreeBSD.org. > _http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 5 80 update3.FreeBSD.org. > _http._tcp.update.freebsd.org has SRV record 1 10 80 update2.FreeBSD.org. > Thank you. This explains what I was seeing and makes it in fact quite normal. -- Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CC082DF.2080203>