Re: mirror.debian.net maintenance
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 21:41:28 +0200, Simon wrote in message
<[🔎] 20080402194128.GB21411@dedibox.ebzao.info>:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 07:44:57PM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > ..do I guess this right that the idea is, prepend architecture
> > names to the current name scheme ftp.$(CC).debian.org to
> > e.g. $(ARCH).ftp2.no.debian.org to enable
> > "deb http://$(ARCH).ftp2.no.debian.org/debian stable main"
> > style entries in "/etc/apt/sources.list"?
> >
> > ..this would make mirroring a wee bit easier, as people can
> > spread a full mirror across several disks or machines, e.g.
> > i386.ftp2.no.debian.org, amd62.ftp2.no.debian.org etc, rather
> > than limit mirroring to volonteers with big ass disk budgets.
>
> I don't see why it would ease to spread across several disks, LVM,
..duh! I've been buying physical disks to fit the entire mirror,
and I don't even smoke, not even tobacco. ;o)
> raid do exist :-)
..aye, now if you have old junk handy that can handle part of the
job, then it becomes possible to put the 2 or 3 high traffic archs
on their own boxes, and then put low traffic archs on a 3'rd or
4'th box and carry a full mirror on your site with decent performance.
> In any case with such a method, you make the rsync from such upstream
> mirrors *much complicated*
..why? All I need upstream for each mirror box, is a same
arch or fuller mirror. Off googling LVM now. ;o)
--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.
Reply to: