-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Mike McGrath wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 06:46:05PM -0400, Ben Boeckel wrote:
Seeing as it is a mirroring daemon, the network is the bottleneck. If it
isn't
then either you're sitting next door, our implementation is bad, or the hardware shouldn't be a mirror in the first place.
Speaking from experience, the network isn't always the bottleneck. I/O performance is often a performance problem, especially when walking the directory tree to build filelists. CPU performance can come into play if you are performing hashes or compression of the data to be transferred. I suggest you post your message to the Fedora mirror-list-d where I'm sure you'll get lots of feedback.
Very true, if this behaves similarly to rsync. Reading over a large change set to transmit only small changes is very resource intensive everywhere but the network.
-Mike
The way we are planning to handle updates should keep this small. The network side knows nothing of the on-disk file structure and the tree-creator part knows nothing of the network other than "it's where the things I need come from", so updates won't be "what's changed in this directory?" so much as "what do I not have that is on my shopping list?" which is then asked for of the network.
- --Ben