On Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:17:32 +0200 Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 02.07.2018 um 19:07 schrieb Brian Morrison: > > On Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:26:34 +0200 > > Reindl Harald wrote: > > > >> Am 02.07.2018 um 08:44 schrieb Bill Maidment: > >>> Maybe these are dumb questions; if so, please ignore. > >>> But doesn't it make more sense to update all the mirrors first, > >>> before changing the DNS? Is there some mechanism to do it that way > >>> round? > >> > >> i wonder why all the linux distributions with update mirrors don't > >> need that DNS theatre to start with.... > > > > Because the rate of updates is much less frequent, the more often > > you need to check the higher the mirror load becomes. Much of this > > load is telling people that there is no newer version... > > says who?
I am basing my comments on the distributed.net experience during the mid to late 90s. At the time they used one of the first DNS-based TXT record update mechanisms, it's broadly similar to how all of these work. At the time this made a very big difference to the load their mirrors were dealing with. > > on a typical setup freshclam is running once or twice *daily* while a > webserver these days can spit out the same small static txt file many > thousands of times per seond with zero load > For me freshclam runs roughly every 2 hours, so I think that the load is an order of magnitude higher than you state. I will confess that I don't know about the capability of web servers in this regard, but the point that d.net made was that the DNS server would always be more capable in this regard than a web server. -- Brian _______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list clamav-users@lists.clamav.net http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
