Re: Too few up-to-date CD image mirrors
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 01:08:51PM +0100, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
> > > Originally, the plan for 3.0r0 was that ISOs would be made available
> > > via jigdo and that mirrors would update using the "jigdo-mirror"
> > > script which I wrote especially for that purpose. (And I mailed all
> > > mirror admins with the details.) Later, the images would also become
> > > available "normally" via rsync (AFAIR), but somehow that never
> > > happened.
> > >
> > > So let's do it their way: I propose that we offer rsync (and maybe
> > > HTTP?) access to the images again starting with 3.0r1. raff has enough
> > > disc space, so the size should not be a problem. Of course, we'd
> > > better implement some kind of access control. And what about
> > > cdimage.d.o? - it would be nice to have another "primary" mirror in
> > > Europe to distribute the load.
> >
> > I asked Ryan (of DSA) about this and he told me that he'd prefer it if we
> > just had people use jigdo since the debian/ mirrors are plenty and likely
> > much faster than mirrors overloaded with heaps of rampant image downloaders.
> > Frankly I agree with that sentiment, there sure are plenty of better ways to
> > waste bandwidth.
>
> Yes, but jigdo is more hassle for the end users. Sure, it is a waste of
> bandwidth, but if we didn't have bandwidth to "waste", we wouldn't run a
> debian[-cd] mirror do begin with. You have a tradeoff there between what
> is convenient for users and what is an effective use of our mirroring
> resources.
>
> But then, the mirror admins that voice their opinions here are those that
> have already stated that they would rather have isos available.
Yep, that's quite a valid argument. I also have images on my mirror because
I do have the bandwidth, and if it'll help a bunch of users, it's probably
worth it, so I keep them.
The thing is, it appears that bandwidth is not such a commodity in the US ;)
and all of our servers that have the disk space -- saens, raff, gluck -- are
there. debian.hands.com, which is more-or-less our server (it's listed at
machines.cgi but it's still Phil's machine) barely has the space for the
stuff that's already on it, and none of the others seem to have space either.
We should probably think about getting another few drives into the new
syncproxy.eu for this...
> > But then, we already have a bunch of mirrors that do have images, so
> > _something_ needs to be done to bring back the consistency.
>
> Yes. A restricted rsync access to main mirrors would be good enough if we
> don't want cdimage.d.o (or cdimage.us) to waste too much bandwidth. Just
> so that once we have built the images with jigdo we can rsync the
> directory structure against an official structure.
Hmm. One thing, though, why keep the images locked on that machine just for
a sync that happens every few months? Plus the administrative overhead of
giving out accounts.
Alternatively we could improve the ghastly blubbery
http://www.debian.org/CD/mirroring/ to be more to the point...
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Please Cc: responses, I read -cd only via the archives.
Reply to: