| 1 |
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:17:55PM +0200, Francesco R wrote: |
| 2 |
> Proposal, create snapshots of portage as squashfs iso, to be used in |
| 3 |
> place of /usr/portage directory. |
| 4 |
To all of these suggestions, I'd like to point out that if you're |
| 5 |
willing to pay the same cost in administration (maintaining a separate |
| 6 |
filesystem for /usr/portage), then you can have EVERYTHING in the |
| 7 |
advantages list, and none of the things in the disadvantages list by |
| 8 |
simply using a small reiserfs space for /usr/portage, with tail-packing |
| 9 |
enabled. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
For the rsync.g.o main rotation servers, we actually do that, just |
| 12 |
RAM-backed to serve files as fast as possible without hitting disk. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
When you removed bandwidth limitations and disk limitations on the |
| 15 |
client side, I believe the record time for a emerge --sync that was 24 |
| 16 |
hours out of date was somewhere around 23 seconds. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
If you really wanted to get the rsync transfer size down, see what you |
| 19 |
can do about the 'file list size' section, which is eating up a lot of |
| 20 |
the download gains with the classical rsync:// sync. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
| 24 |
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy |
| 25 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
| 26 |
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 |
Archives