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.