Re: package pool and big Packages.gz file
>>>>> " " == Matt Zimmerman <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 03:49:43PM +0100, Goswin Brederlow
>> Actually the load should drop, providing the following feature
>> add ons: [...]
> The load should drop from that induced by the current rsync
> setup (for the mirrors), but if many, many more client start
> using rsync (instead of FTP/HTTP), I think there will still be
> a significant net increase in load.
> Whether it would be enough to cause a problem is debatable, and
> I honestly don't know either way.
When the checksums are cached there will be no cpu load caused by
rsync, since it will only transfer the file. And the checksum files
will be realy small as I said, so if some similarity is found the
reduction in data will make more than up for the checksum download.
The only increase is the space needed to store the checksums in some
form of cache.