1 |
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
> We have already received numerous complaints from our mirror admins about |
5 |
> the amount of disk space we chew up now. For reference, here is a break |
6 |
> down: |
7 |
> |
8 |
> 9.7G ./releases |
9 |
> 139M ./snapshots |
10 |
> 17G ./distfiles |
11 |
> 6.6G ./experimental |
12 |
> |
13 |
> [real-big-snip] |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Thoughts? Ideas? |
16 |
> |
17 |
|
18 |
Looking at the numbers you provided, i think we should seperate the |
19 |
mirrors into two groups: Binary and Source. Binary mirrors would provide |
20 |
GRPs and ISOs, and source mirrors will only provide distfiles. Mirrors |
21 |
could provide both, of course. |
22 |
|
23 |
In the short term, there won't be too many binary mirrors (freeing almost |
24 |
17 gigs of free space is tempting), so we should encourage mirrors that |
25 |
are high on diskspace to mirror both source and binary. |
26 |
|
27 |
In the long term, this could also rise the numbers of mirrors, as mirror |
28 |
provideres will need to 'waste' less disk space on the gentoo mirror (if |
29 |
they choose to only mirror one type, that is). |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Tal Peer |
33 |
Gentoo Developer |
34 |
|
35 |
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x253D2947 |
36 |
Key Fingerprint: C0B1 D91D 7323 6C0F 227A CBD6 D635 E53D 253D 2947 |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |