3 ms·
On Windows, a large hosts file may lead to noticeably slower name resolution performance. Maybe it's less of a problem on Linux/macOS...?
by fuzzy2 7y ago
On Windows, a large hosts file may lead to noticeably slower name resolution performance. Maybe it's less of a problem on Linux/macOS...?
- vezycash 7y agoIt did happen to me. I used StevenBlack's Unified hosts + fakenews + gambling + porn + social It's over 1.4mb. And after any edit to the host file, it'd take minutes before I could browse. (Hard drive) When I switched to SSD, the delay dropped to less than a minute. For domains I already visited, cached, there were no perceptible resolution delays.
- jeroenhd 7y agoI learned this the hard a few years back. The lookup performance was good enough, but every time I woke the computer up from sleep or rebooted it, it would spend ten minutes maxing out one or two cores trying to process a hosts file blocking all known malware/spyware/adware domains. This took me ages to find the cause of, I had to use a lot of highly-escalated debuggers and such to figure out what the "system" process was trying to do that was costing so much time. Once I cleared out the hosts file, the problem was resolved.
- t0astbread 7y agoI'm on Linux and I have had a large hosts-based block list for a few months now and I haven't noticed any slowdowns so far.
- driverdan 7y agoI have a large hosts file on my Mac with Steven Black's blocklists. It takes a few seconds to load in vim but doesn't seem to cause any problems with lookups.