Summary: | mirrorselect 1.1.3: Deep mode returns too few servers. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Duncan <1i5t5.duncan> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Colin Kingsley (RETIRED) <tercel> |
Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: |
emerge info output
mirrorselect debug output |
Description
Duncan
2005-07-20 00:52:38 UTC
Created attachment 63863 [details]
emerge info output
Argh! Mirrorselect version 1.1.3. This new Bugzilla version has a useragent blank that I filled in with that info, but that doesn't seem to appear in the final report. Changing the summary to reflect the version. Could you please run mirrorselect with the -d flag, (in addition to whatever other flags you were using) and redirect the output into a file, and post that file on this bug? I'd like to analyze exactly what is going wrong with my algorithm. This issue does not happen for me, nor should it for you, but I've only been able to test on a few very similar internet connections, so I could be wrong. Once again, thanks for the testing. (In reply to comment #3) > please run mirrorselect with the -d flag [and others used] and redirect the > output into a file, and post that file on this bug? Absolutely! I probably should have done that before (I ran the -d flag myself, but didn't think about posting the output)! Only... one of my ISP's routers is behaving very strangely right now and I don't trust it enough to try updating to the new version with the make.conf fix, presently, so I'll try tomorrow. (With connectivity what it is right now, some sites working some failing, some failing intermittently, I couldn't get an accurate run anyway... =8^( FWIW tho, I had similar problems pre-1.0, but it was a different issue, IIRC. Back then, the test files were apparently not on most of the servers, or at least when I checked them manually by browser they were missing, and changing the test file to something else cured the issue. This time, the files are showing up when I check manually, and the debug info seems to indicate they are being found as well, only the thing is rejecting the downloads too early, as described. One other possibility... I'm running python-2.4.1-r1 (~arch), which just came out of testing not long ago. Maybe there's some issue mirrorselect is activating, perhaps only on ~amd64, that's a corner case nobody's yet caught? I don't think it likely, but it's possible. ... I just wish that stupid ISP router would get back to full working order so I could test this thing and post the log! Created attachment 64240 [details]
mirrorselect debug output
Well, router and follow-on cable modem issues fixed, so I can finally get a
decent debug test, full debug output attached. The below are the highlights.
Mirrorselect version (updated):
1.1.4
Command used:
mirrorselect -odD -s20 -t10
Partial output from first two mirrors:
[1 of 156]
_deeptime(): timeout is 10
deeptime(): 0.775030851364 seconds
_list_add(): added host [snip] with a time of 0.775030851364
_list_add(): new max time is 0.775030851364 seconds, and now len(host_dict)= 1
[2 of 156]
_deeptime(): timeout is 0.775030851364
deeptime(): download timed out. killing wget.
deeptime(): wget returned -1, adding 10 to delta
Final number of hosts over number requested:
8/20
See what I mean? It sets the timeout to the return time of the first host, so
nothing higher than that gets added to the list. As it happens, there were
seven additional mirrors faster than the first one tested, so I got a total of
eight in the output list, but I requested twenty. Often, I only get four.
Fixed in next release (1.1.5) Confirmed fixed in mirrorselect-1.1.5. Setting bug full-closed. |