| 1 |
On 11/28/2012 11:08 AM, Matthew Thode wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 11/28/2012 09:05 AM, Richard Yao wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 11/28/2012 09:17 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> We could slightly simplify the handbook installation procedure if we |
| 6 |
>>>> told people to use emerge-webrsync to fetch the initial snapshot. |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> Using emerge-webrsync also makes the installation process more robust, |
| 9 |
>>> since it only requires HTTP access (whereas many firewalls restrict |
| 10 |
>>> RSYNC). Besides, emerge-webrsync can check PGP signatures, so I think |
| 11 |
>>> that it should be the primary recommended portage tree synchronization |
| 12 |
>>> method. |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> The only downside of which I am aware is increased network traffic. |
| 16 |
>> However, we could redesign emerge-webrsync to take advantage of GNU |
| 17 |
>> Tar's incremental archive functionality. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> That would permit us to mirror compressed diffs in addition to regular |
| 20 |
>> portage snapshots. Doing that well could reduce bandwidth requirements. |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
> weekly fulls and daily diffs? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Determining what is right here probably requires calculus, but this |
| 26 |
scheme does not seem like a bad choice to me. My main concern is that |
| 27 |
maintaining weekly full snapshots would require too much space for the |
| 28 |
mirrors. It might be better go monthly, with diffs on the following |
| 29 |
intervals: |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
1 week |
| 32 |
1 day |
| 33 |
30 minutes |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Doing that would eliminate the benefit of rsync entirely, with the |
| 36 |
caveat that we now need to mirror a ton of diffs. This would make it |
| 37 |
easy for us to provide the ability to obtain historical snapshots, which |
| 38 |
would be nice. |
Archives