On Tue, 2018-12-18 at 12:55 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 23:15:47 -0500 Alec Warner wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I am currently embarking on a plan to redo our existing rsync[0] mirror
> > network. The current network has aged a bit. Its likely too large and is
> > under-maintained. I think in the ideal case we would instead pivot this
> > project to scaling out our git mirror capabilities and slowly migrate all
> > consumers to pulling the git tree directly. To that end, I'm looking for
> > blockers as to why various customers cannot switch to pulling the gentoo
> > ebuild repository from git[1] instead of rsync.
> > 
> > So for example:
> > 
> > - bandwidth concerns (preferably with documentation / data.)
> > - Firewall concerns
> > - CPU concerns (e.g. rsync is great for tiny systems?)
> > - Disk usage for git vs rsync
> > - Other things i have not thought of.
> 
> My main concern with git is downlink fault tolerance. If rsync
> connection is broken, it can be easily restored without much data
> retransmission. If git download connection is broken, it has to
> start all over again. So there are cases where rsync will be always
> much more preferable than git.
> 

I think this mostly applies to the initial clone, and in this case
the git bundles (that will be) offered by Infra should solve it.  You'd
download them over regular HTTP(S) connection which you can freely
resume.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny