From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j2NMFhgV027975 for ; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:15:43 GMT Received: from 203-79-82-53.adsl-wns.paradise.net.nz ([203.79.82.53] helo=www.rout.co.nz) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DEE8c-0001GC-S7 for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:15:43 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.2] (nick.rout.co.nz [192.168.1.2]) by www.rout.co.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF532518 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:15:41 +1200 (NZST) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 10:15:42 +1200 From: Nick Rout To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an alternative portage tree sync method In-Reply-To: <200503222358.19166.gentoo-dev@wizy.org> References: <1111499711.7251.16.camel@localhost> <200503222358.19166.gentoo-dev@wizy.org> Message-Id: <20050324101350.CC09.NICK@rout.co.nz> Precedence: bulk List-Post: , , List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.12.01 [en] X-Archives-Salt: 04f084b0-c701-446b-9e0c-4c7445db708c X-Archives-Hash: 2a079e42f764f3144e27e1e61f6009b2 It sounds interesting Ricardo. May I suggest that if you have the resources you set it up on your own LAN or something, then compare the results with rsync. You may need to get a few friends to do it over the net too, in order to try it on something less traffic friendly than your LAN. On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 23:58:19 +0000 Ricardo Correia wrote: > On Tuesday 22 March 2005 13:55, Patrick Lauer wrote: > > > > A few problems: > > - that .iso and the .zsync metadata need to be generated. More load on > > master server > > - isos don't allow easy access, e.g. writing a few bytes for a tricial > > bugfix > > - mkisofs might shuffle the data so that transferring one large file > > might cause more traffic than rsync does now > > > > I don't see the advantages over tar + binary diffs. > > > > You make valid points, but notice: > - The .zsync metadata doesn't have to be generated on the master server. > Anyone can do it right now. > - ISO's would have to be regenerated periodically. This could vary from every > 30 minutes to only once per day, we'd have to see how it works. > Personally I think every 30 minutes would be viable, but it's not really > necessary. Once per day would be enough and better than emerge-webrsync.. > > The advantage over tar + binary diffs: > - Client doesn't have to remove entire portage tree and extract the tar file > every sync. > - I think xdelta might be possible, but bsdiff would be impossible due to the > memory requirements for a tar this large. I don't really know how xdelta > performs CPU-wise and memory-wise.. > - It's simpler (only 2 files on the server and very few commands > necessary) :-) > -- > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- Nick Rout Barrister & Solicitor Christchurch -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list