Re: some proposed changes/requirements for apt
On Thu, 16 May 2002, jason andrade wrote:
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> > No. We have found that some web servers will use redirects to correct
> > spelling mistakes, a properly functioning archive server should never
> > issue them.
>
> Our issue is that apache isn't scaling well for us for our current
> traffic levels (about 1Tb/day) and we have to take measures to deal
> with this. Splitting it between different types of servers has worked
> well, but the only problem we have is dealing with apt.
1 terabit? Hmm.. ftp.d.o does about 3 terabit/day and it isn't bothered
too much running apache. It's just a little P2-350 too.
If you are doing a terabyte/day.. Well.. good lord! :>
Anyhow, if you are worried about load from apt then doing redirects at all
will be noticable both to you and your clients. It is much better to
simply avoid them entirely.
> with a browser will fail. (i don't even pretend to be clueful about
> using apt - does it ever try and do any kind of directory listing?)
Nope. Only http get. One big warning though, if you are using a web server
other than apache it may be slightly buggy and people using it with APT
may get upset. In the past servers have had problems with HTTP/1.1
If-Range, pipelining and keepalive that APT makes heavy use of.
Jason
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deity-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: