Re: A success story with apt and rsync
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sunday 06 July 2003 11:27, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Koblinger Egmont <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Hi,
> > >From time to time the question arises on different forums whether it is
> > possible to efficiently use rsync with apt-get. Recently there has been a
> > thread here on debian-devel and it was also mentioned in Debian Weekly
> > News June 24th, 2003. However, I only saw different small parts of a huge
> > and complex problem set discussed at different places, I haven't find an
> > overview of the whole situation anywhere.
> summarize what I still remember:
> 2. most of the time you have no old file to rsync against. Only
> mirrors will have an old file and they already use rsync.
> 4. (and this is the knockout) rsync support for apt-get is NO
> WANTED. rsync uses too much resources (cpu and more relevant IO) on
> the server side and a widespread use of rsync for apt-get would choke
> the rsync mirrors and do more harm than good.
When I was looking into this I heard about some work into caching the rolling
checksums to eliminate server load. I didn't find any code.
> Doogie is thinking about extending the Bittorrent protocol for use as
> apt-get method. I talked with him on irc about some design ideas and
> so far it looks realy good if he can get some mirrors to host it.
Sounds interesting. bittorrent allocates people to peer off in a round-robin
fashon, which is really stupid. If two people have similar IPs they should
make a better peer.
> Via another small extension rolling
> checksums for each block could be included in the protocol and a
> client side rsync can be done. (I heard this variant of rsync would be
> patented in US but never saw real proof of it.)
Likewise on both counts.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----