On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 02:28, Anthony Towns wrote:
I think you'll find you're also unfairly weighting this against people
who do daily updates. If you do an update once a month, it's not as much
of a bother waiting a while to download the Packages files -- you're
going to have to wait _much_
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 04:35, Michael Bramer wrote:
Scheme Disk space Bandwidth
---
Checksums (bwidth optimal)26K 81K
diffs (4 days)32K 331K
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 09:46, Erich Schubert wrote:
What diff options do you use?
As the diffs are expected to be applied to the correct version, they
probably shouldn't contain the old data, but the new data only.
Good point. I used diff -ed, so I think this is not including
unnecessary
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 10:40:31PM -0700, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 02:28, Anthony Towns wrote:
I'd suggest your formula would be better off being:
bandwidthcost = sum( x = 1..30, prob(x) * cost(x) / x )
I think it depends on what you're measuring. I can
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 00:14, Anthony Towns wrote:
No, I'm not. I'm saying that the amount of time spent waiting for
apt-get update needs to count every apt-get update you run, not just
the first. So, if over a period of a week, I run it seven times, and you
run it once, I wait seven times as
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:25:22AM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:02:34PM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
you propose to add 'some' diff files for all files on ftp-master.d.o?
With rsync we need only one rsync-checksum file per normal file and
all apt's
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 17:25, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
What you are suggesting is that the server store checksums for precalculated
blocks on the server. This would be 4 bytes per 1k in the original file or
so. The transaction proceeds as follows:
1. Client asks for checksum list off
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:26:17AM -0700, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
- I tend to update every day. For people who update every day, the
diff-based scheme only needs to transfer about 8K, but the
checksum-based scheme needs to transfer 45K. So for me, diffs are
better. :)
I think you'll
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 07:28:42PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
0 days of diffs: 843.7 KiB (the current situation)
...which pretty much matches what I'd expect: at the moment, just to
update main, people download around 1.2MB per day;
Uh, obviously this should be 843KiB. (I'd been playing
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I beleive this method is patented by somebody, [snip]
has someone a pointer?
Here's some stuff from my mail archives - I haven't checked whether
the links
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 09:22:50AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:25:22AM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
With the standard rsync algorithm, the rsync checksum files would actually
be 8 times larger than the original file (you need to store the checksum
for
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 01:26:17AM -0700, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
This looks like an interesting algorithm, so I decided to compare it to
the diff scheme analyzed in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200204/msg00502.html
The above message also gives my analysis
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 08:29:49PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 09:22:50AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 10:25:22AM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
With the standard rsync algorithm, the rsync checksum files would actually
be 8
Scheme Disk space Bandwidth
---
Checksums (bwidth optimal)26K 81K
diffs (4 days)32K 331K
diffs (9 days)71K
hello
we sould stop this and start after woody again...
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:17:46PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
I'd suggest using diffs, as this brings the best results and is the
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 04:49:25AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Otto Wyss) cum veritate scripsit:
Packages.0 from 28-March is probably the newest and the smallest upgrade
is problably the diff for one day (209k uncompressed, 50k gzipped). On
the 28th rsync's download
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:11:00AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
- I would like to have templates with substitution fields.
Already exists.
Any references?
How about the debconf manual?
but sorry, we have some outdated translations in debconf templates
files. No translator
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
I'd suggest using diffs, as this brings the best results and is the
[diffs for Packages files that is]
wooo!!!
http://people.debian.org/~dancer/Packages-for-main-i386/
# Time for suggesting is up, please
On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 11:16:44AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
Joey Hess wrote on Wed Mar 27, 2002 um 02:21:49PM:
That is a rather misleading summary of the situation, which as a
subscriber to debian-boot, you should understand better. Have you done
any testing of the
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
hello
we sould stop this and start after woody again...
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:17:46PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
I'd suggest using diffs, as this brings
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
This isn't server friendly.
no. sorry. I must say this:
We can use rsync on the client site.
- get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
use/supported.
Other than that, it's very nice idea. I beleive there may be some
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:53:44AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:11:00AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
- I would like to have templates with substitution fields.
Already exists.
Any references?
How about the debconf manual?
but sorry, we
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
use/supported.
Possibly it
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 03:24:42PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists wrote:
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I beleive this
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
hello
we sould stop this and start after woody again...
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 08:17:46PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 04:55:17PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
Sorry, diffs are simply silly! Use rsync
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:02:14AM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:53:44AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:11:00AM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
- I would like to have templates with substitution fields.
Already exists.
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:34:43PM +0200, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 09:09:39AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
no. sorry. I must say this:
We can use rsync on the client site.
- get a rsync-checksum file (use a fix block size)
- make the check on the client site
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:25:04PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 06:39:19PM +1000, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I beleive this method is patented by somebody, which is why it's not in
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Michael Bramer wrote:
- make the check on the client site and
- download the file partly per ftp/http
- make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.
Rumor around rsync circles is that this is
Le mar 09/04/2002 à 20:13, Jason Gunthorpe a écrit :
- make the check on the client site and
- download the file partly per ftp/http
- make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.
Rumor around rsync circles is
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2001/debian-devel-200111/msg00757.html
Thanks for this pointer.
My debiansynch script never runs into problem 1. rsync -r since it
always does single file transfers. And for problem 2. rsync of near
identical files it's not astonishing using a high cpu load
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 05:02:34PM +0200, Michael Bramer wrote:
you propose to add 'some' diff files for all files on ftp-master.d.o?
With rsync we need only one rsync-checksum file per normal file and
all apt's need only download the neededs parts.
You get the point?
With the standard
* Jeroen Dekkers
| It does also other things, like making distribution creation more
| flexible. I'm thinking of having a some kind of package file for every
| source package. That would include the current information and maybe a
| lot more things like URL of upstream, license, etc. This file
On Sun, Apr 07, 2002 at 10:28:12PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
* Jeroen Dekkers
| It does also other things, like making distribution creation more
| flexible. I'm thinking of having a some kind of package file for every
| source package. That would include the current information and
Adam Majer wrote:
On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 01:53:00PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
1) Large packages files
[... 3 level idea ...]
I would suggest a solution that is much easier to manage. That is, packages
should be sorted according to the date that the package was modified.
This could be
36 matches
Mail list logo
