Subject: Re: sup problems?
To: Andrew Gillham <gillhaa@ghost.whirlpool.com>
From: M Graff <explorer@flame.org>
List: current-users
Date: 09/27/1999 09:27:37
ftp.netbsd.org needs some kernel tweaks, which I am going to do
today. I'll ask you to try again after I finish with them; I suspect
you'll notice much improved performance.
--Michael
Andrew Gillham <gillhaa@ghost.whirlpool.com> writes:
> Aaron J. Grier writes:
> > for the past couple days I haven't been able to get current-pkgsrc from
> > sup... it just times out. Maybe it's time to switch to rsync? ;)
>
> I have been trying to sup over a modem link for several days now. I
> am consistently getting a 26400 connection. Sunday I left sup running
> all afternoon (with a 'ping -i 30 xxxx' also) and it finished up 7 hours
> 8 minutes later. I had last run sup on Sept 21. I ran sup again, it was
> done in 15 minutes or so. (did nothing)
>
> It didn't appear to me that a significant number of files were received,
> mostly it went through and updated nearly every file. Which is odd as
> I run ntpdate on my box consistently.
>
> I noticed that during the sup process, I believe after the initial file
> information exchange, the connection is completely idle for quite some
> time. (I don't know exactly, but I believe more than 15 minutes or so)
> This is why I added the 'ping -i 30' so my ISP doesn't hang up on me.
>
> I'm not sure what all this means, other than sup seems ridiculously slow
> to me over a modem. I'm used to running it over a 128Kb ISDN link and it
> never takes anywhere near 7 hours. More like 30 minutes or less.
>
> I would be interested in some benchmarks (times, bytes, etc) of the various
> methods of updating, if anyone has any. :)
>
> -Andrew
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Andrew Gillham | This space left blank
> gillham@whirlpool.com | inadvertently.
> I speak for myself, not for my employer. | Contact the publisher.