Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:06:01 +0800
From:      Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg>
To:        Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com>,  FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: performance impact of large /etc/hosts files
Message-ID:  <475F4209.8080507@pacific.net.sg>
In-Reply-To: <475EC215.8060004@dial.pipex.com>
References:  <475E0190.7030909@pacific.net.sg>	<200712111718.05876.nvass@teledomenet.gr>	<475EAC9D.1020902@pacific.net.sg>	<20071211084309.A16234@wonkity.com> <475EB887.6070902@pacific.net.sg> <475EC215.8060004@dial.pipex.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
> Erich Dollansky wrote:
> 
> Assuming I've understood your initial post correctly, then I do the 
> same, redirecting some dozen ad sites to a  local web server.  With a 

this is how I started. Then friends did the same. We exchanged the 
files. We added hosts files from the Internet.

> dozen or so aliases I've never noticed any difference in performance, 
> but I suspect you have rather more than that :-)  I could never quite be 

I also do not notice a difference. Especially news sites with all the 
ads are even faster as there is no waiting for the ads.

> I'm pretty sure you could also do the same with a local DNS server, if 

This is what I am thinking of since some time but I never did.

It would have the additional advantage of faster name resolution.

Having a DNS on every machine seems like a real overkill to me.

> There's no clean solutions to getting different lookups per-user that I 

The clen solution is hosts.

> Unclean solutions might include something like making the hosts file 

This is something I would like to avoid.

Erich



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?475F4209.8080507>