| 1 |
Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Monday 11 October 2004 12:37, Travis Tilley wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>>Duncan wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>>.. About 3 and a half minutes. I just timed it. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>>rm -rf /usr/portage and time it again. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> For people that have slow rsync times, there is the alternative to run |
| 13 |
> emerge-websync. It is maximally a day behind and works well. |
| 14 |
> Unfortunately it needs to download a lot more, but doesn't need to scan |
| 15 |
> the whole local and remote trees. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Actually, it will scan two trees, two *local* ones, on top of some extra I/O |
| 18 |
FYI, webrsync does : |
| 19 |
1) download a 16M snapshot |
| 20 |
2) unpack its 100,000+ files |
| 21 |
<rant>latest GWN sees it as a record, let's aim for 250,000 files</rant> |
| 22 |
3) run rsync between temp dir and /usr/portage |
| 23 |
4) rm 100,000 temp files |
| 24 |
5) emerge metadata |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
emerge-webrsync is not meant to decrease I/O, in fact, it increases local I/O. |
| 27 |
It is meant for people who can't use rsync because it's blocked (or because |
| 28 |
there is no connection at all). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Wkr, |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
/ Xavier Neys |
| 34 |
\_ Gentoo Documentation Project |
| 35 |
/ French & Internationalisation Lead |
| 36 |
\ http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en |
| 37 |
/\ |
Archives