On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 03:17 -0500, Peter Arremann wrote: > How about getting the 5 fastest results the first time - then when you run, > start with the first in the list (that way you probably get more consistent > performance) and if that server isn't available, the user cancels out cause > its too slow or something like that, then go to the next server and also find > a new one in the background? That should be fairly seemless for the user > since its fairly unlikely that a normal user will run out of servers in his > list before a new one has been found... This could have some interesting effects.... The nearest and normally best server to me is in a building within sight and with direct fibre. However that server is a known Fedora mirror. On release days (or weeks) it, um, struggles somewhat (load average of 250 is normal) and we hit the user limits. So if you install during the release week, and (rightly) update immediately afterwards, you *could* end up with strange ideas of how the network looks, which are not really valid when the fuss calms down a bit. Not a major problem, but release periods tends to be... strange. Nigel. -- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
