Re: proposal for a more efficient download process
> I. the reason why i suggest a patch-oriented download process
+1. We've been using bsdiff (http://www.daemonology.net/bsdiff/) at
work for some internal stuff and it's great. Furthermore, since unstable has
gone to using diffs for the Packages files, my dselect updates have been
*way* faster. Having the actual downloads go faster as well would be
awesome.
Some work will have to go into the math to determine when it's
actually more efficient to download the latest archive, etc.... just a
fleeting mental note, the threshold should not be 100% of the full archives
size, it should be 90 or 80% due to the CPU/RAM overhead of patching and the
bandwidth/latency overhead of requesting multiple patch files vs. one
stream of data.
Cheers,
Tyler
Reply to: