]] Julien Cristau > On 12/12/2017 03:39 PM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > DSA, thoughts on this? Sounds reasonable? > > > I think the issue is also made worse by mirror-bytemark being > consistently much slower than the other backends, and how ftpsync > behaves in a pathological way when mirrors have very different speeds.
Agreed, we should fix this on both the mirror-health side and how we push. > When doing a staged push, we start stage1 for all downstreams. Each of > those, when it's done, waits for up to $PUSHDELAY, by default 10 > minutes, for its siblings to signal they're also done with stage1. If > all goes well, everyone waits for everyone else to be done with stage1, > then within 5 seconds of each other they run stage2. Why do we do this? To avoid having inconsistent mirrors? Can we solve this by having names that incorporate _health instead and just have mirrors take whatever time they need? This will cause some traffic to slosh around as mirrors go healthy and unhealthy, but hopefully not more than what we can handle? -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
