Re: DNS caches that support partitioning ?

2012-08-19 Thread Gary Buhrmaster
Re: LRU badness One approach is called adaptive replacement cache (ARC) which is used by Oracle/Sun in ZFS, and was used in PostgreSQL for a time (and slightly modified to (as I recall) to be more like 2Q due to concerns over the IBM patent on the algorithm). Unfortunately, we do not have any imp

Re: DNS caches that support partitioning ?

2012-08-19 Thread Jimmy Hess
On 8/19/12, Mark Andrews wrote: > As for the original problem. LRU replacement will keep "hot" items in > the cache unless it is seriously undersized. [snip] Well, that's the problem. Items that are not relatively "hot" will be purged, even though they may be very popular RRs. Cache efficien

Re: DNS caches that support partitioning ?

2012-08-19 Thread William Herrin
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > As for the original problem. LRU replacement will keep "hot" items in > the cache unless it is seriously undersized. Maybe. This discussion is reminiscent of the Linux swappiness debate. Early in the 2.x series Linux kernels, the guy respon

Re: BGP Play broken?

2012-08-19 Thread John Kemp
OK. I think we have something going at http://bgplay.routeviews.org/ again. Thought I would change things up a bit since we were having problems with some of the route-views2 collector data. So the setup now defaults to the data from the collectors: route-views.paix.routeviews.org, route-views.

Re: DNS caches that support partitioning ?

2012-08-19 Thread Mark Andrews
In message , Chris Woodfiel d writes: > What Patrick said. For large sites that offer services in multiple data = > centers on multiple IPs that can individually fail at any time, 300 = > seconds is actually a bit on the long end. > > -C Which is why the DNS supports multiple address records. C

Re: DNS caches that support partitioning ?

2012-08-19 Thread Chris Woodfield
What Patrick said. For large sites that offer services in multiple data centers on multiple IPs that can individually fail at any time, 300 seconds is actually a bit on the long end. -C On Aug 18, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > On Aug 18, 2012, at 8:44, Jimmy Hess wrote: > >>