| 1 |
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:39:29PM +0300, Tal Peer wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > We have already received numerous complaints from our mirror admins about |
| 6 |
> > the amount of disk space we chew up now. For reference, here is a break |
| 7 |
> > down: |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > 9.7G ./releases |
| 10 |
> > 139M ./snapshots |
| 11 |
> > 17G ./distfiles |
| 12 |
> > 6.6G ./experimental |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > [real-big-snip] |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > Thoughts? Ideas? |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Looking at the numbers you provided, i think we should seperate the |
| 20 |
> mirrors into two groups: Binary and Source. Binary mirrors would provide |
| 21 |
> GRPs and ISOs, and source mirrors will only provide distfiles. Mirrors |
| 22 |
> could provide both, of course. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> In the short term, there won't be too many binary mirrors (freeing almost |
| 25 |
> 17 gigs of free space is tempting), so we should encourage mirrors that |
| 26 |
> are high on diskspace to mirror both source and binary. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> In the long term, this could also rise the numbers of mirrors, as mirror |
| 29 |
> provideres will need to 'waste' less disk space on the gentoo mirror (if |
| 30 |
> they choose to only mirror one type, that is). |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I think we should probably start with leaving non-GRP LiveCD ISOs on |
| 34 |
"source' mirrors in that case and see how that works for mirror |
| 35 |
providers. Otherwise, we may have a lot of frustrated users who can't |
| 36 |
find CDs. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Jon Portnoy |
| 40 |
avenj/irc.freenode.net |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives