Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The best thing to do is simply to expect propagation delay.
Actually, I just sent a gripe off to Marc about this. I've been
noticing large and variable propagation delay for a few months now,
but I just today realized that the problem is entirely local to hub.org.
For example, look at the headers on your message:
Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7LJKpY10196
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:20:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from postgresql.org.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with SMTP id f7LJKpP46374;
Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:20:52 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Received: from www.wgcr.org (www.wgcr.org [206.74.232.194])
by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f7LHxnP15711
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:59:49 -0400 (EDT)
(envelope-from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Received: from lowen.wgcr.org (IDENT:lowen@[10.1.2.3])
by www.wgcr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/WGCR) with SMTP id NAA25357;
Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:59:40 -0400
All the delay seems to be in transferring the message from
postgresql.org to webmail.postgresql.org ... which are the same
machine, or at least the same IP address. What's up with that?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
