http://rsync.samba.org/rsync-and-debian/
I'd appreciate comments.
This is certainly a very informative page. I'd appreciate if the CPU
load problem could be solved somehow.
IMO the versioning patch from Paul Russell is not the right approach
since this is Debian specific and has
On 13 Apr 2002, Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 10:19:27PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
The big problem with rproxy is it's implemented in perl (perl: crypto for
There might be some other unrelated program called rproxy that's in
Perl, but the one I wrote certainly
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Martin Pool wrote:
I'd appreciate comments.
Hmm...
As you may know I'm both the APT author, administrator of the top level
debian mirrors and associated mirror network. So,
3.2 rsync is too hard on servers
If it is, then I think we should fix the problems, rather than
On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 01:15, Martin Pool wrote:
There seems to be a thread about rsync and Debian packages every
couple of months. I've written up a document which tries to cover all
of the questions and debates. It's pretty informal, but hopefully
will be useful.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 11:48:01PM -0700, Robert Tiberius Johnson wrote:
Also, in section 3.15, you say, Fetching a series of deltas which
update the same area is less efficient than calculating the deltas
directly. This is true, but by my computations, the number of packages
which change
On 12 Apr 2002, Jason Gunthorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nobody8835 25.7 0.3 22120 1740 ?RN Apr10 525:24 rsync --daemon
nobody 22896 5.0 0.3 22828 1992 ?SN Apr11 21:20 rsync --daemon
nobody3907 7.3 0.5 22336 2820 ?RN Apr11 15:30 rsync --daemon
On 12 Apr 2002, Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've changed my opinion on this since we last talked, partly because
of taking over rsync itself,
... what I meant, but people other than jgg probably didn't know, is
that I was looking at installing rproxy and I'd now rather fix rsync.
--
On 11 Apr 2002, Robert Tiberius Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for all your hard work on rsync. I think it is a great tool.
I'm especially excited to hear it is used in Intermezzo. I like your
rsync/debian web page.
I'm glad you like them.[0]
I feel you aren't fair to diff (in
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 01:28:01PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
On 12 Apr 2002, Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think some more details is required regarding rproxy.
[...]
AFAIK, it solves all the problems regarding server load discussed in
rsync, doesn't it???
Why did you think
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 06:19:07PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
What I'd really like is to have access to one of these machines and be
able to attach debuggers to rsync and see what it's doing. (In this case,
that would mean being able to ssh in as 'nobody', or something
equivalent.) I realize
3.1 Compressed files cannot be differenced
I recall seeing some work done to determine how much savings you could
expect if you used xdeltas of the uncompressed data. This would be the
best result you could expect from gzip --rsyncable. I recall the numbers
were disapointing, it was 50%
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 10:19:27PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
The big problem with rproxy is it's implemented in perl (perl: crypto for
Are we talking about the same code here?
[502] [snoopy:unstable:bam] ~ ldd /usr/sbin/rproxy
libc.so.6 = /lib/libc.so.6 (0x4001e000)
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 01:28:01PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
Why did you think that?
rproxy addresses a rather different problem to rsync: for example, it
transfers only one file at a time, not whole directories. No, rproxy
does not have a magic way to do the delta computation in zero time.
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 01:47, Martin Pool wrote:
On 11 Apr 2002, Robert Tiberius Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, in section 3.15, you say, Fetching a series of deltas which
update the same area is less efficient than calculating the deltas
directly. This is true, but by my
There seems to be a thread about rsync and Debian packages every
couple of months. I've written up a document which tries to cover all
of the questions and debates. It's pretty informal, but hopefully
will be useful.
http://rsync.samba.org/rsync-and-debian/
I'd appreciate comments.
--
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Martin Pool wrote:
There seems to be a thread about rsync and Debian packages every
couple of months. I've written up a document which tries to cover all
of the questions and debates. It's pretty informal, but hopefully
will be useful.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 06:15:43PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
There seems to be a thread about rsync and Debian packages every
couple of months. I've written up a document which tries to cover all
of the questions and debates. It's pretty informal, but hopefully
will be useful.
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Brian May wrote:
I think some more details is required regarding rproxy.
Why is nobody actively developing it?
AFAIK, it solves all the problems regarding server load discussed in
rsync, doesn't it???
No. I tested it out, and it still hits the server hard.
--
To
On 12 Apr 2002, Brian May [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think some more details is required regarding rproxy.
I've added a lot more detail about rproxy, and my understanding of
Goswin's proposal. Let me know if they're unclear.
Why is nobody actively developing it?
I'm not sure what kind of
19 matches
Mail list logo
