-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 06 July 2003 11:27, Goswin Brederlow wrote: > Koblinger Egmont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Hi, > > > > >From time to time the question arises on different forums whether it is > > > > possible to efficiently use rsync with apt-get. Recently there has been a > > thread here on debian-devel and it was also mentioned in Debian Weekly > > News June 24th, 2003. However, I only saw different small parts of a huge > > and complex problem set discussed at different places, I haven't find an > > overview of the whole situation anywhere. > > ... > > Lets > summarize what I still remember: > > 2. most of the time you have no old file to rsync against. Only > mirrors will have an old file and they already use rsync.
/var/cache/apt/ ? > 4. (and this is the knockout) rsync support for apt-get is NO > WANTED. rsync uses too much resources (cpu and more relevant IO) on > the server side and a widespread use of rsync for apt-get would choke > the rsync mirrors and do more harm than good. When I was looking into this I heard about some work into caching the rolling checksums to eliminate server load. I didn't find any code. > Doogie is thinking about extending the Bittorrent protocol for use as > apt-get method. I talked with him on irc about some design ideas and > so far it looks realy good if he can get some mirrors to host it. Sounds interesting. bittorrent allocates people to peer off in a round-robin fashon, which is really stupid. If two people have similar IPs they should make a better peer. > Via another small extension rolling > checksums for each block could be included in the protocol and a > client side rsync can be done. (I heard this variant of rsync would be > patented in US but never saw real proof of it.) Likewise on both counts. Corrin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/B28si5A0ZsG8x8cRAuuoAJ9+wAEhoRcfBDsAtj96KHowqlM03QCffbF1 sl5I76+IzUdF2MavgDLJcls= =6X9X -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----