On 21 March 2018 at 00:25, Steve Langasek <steve.langa...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 03:09:55PM +0000, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: >> On 16 March 2018 at 22:13, Steve Langasek <steve.langa...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >> > In other words: if we want to make this the default, we should quantify >> > Daniel's remark that he would prefer a 6% faster download over a 10% faster >> > unpack. > >> Well, I think it does not make sense to think about this in absolute >> terms. Thinking about user stories is better. > > Sure. > >> A stable series user will be mostly upgrading packages from -security >> and -updates. The download speed and/or size of debs does not matter >> much in this case, as these are scheduled to be done in the background >> over the course of the day, via unattended upgrades download timer. >> Installation speed matters, as that is the window of time when the >> system is actually somewhat in a maintenance mode / degraded >> performance (apt is locked, there are CPU and disk-io loads). > > Does unattended upgrades download both -security and -updates, or does it > only download -security? From what I can see in > /usr/bin/unattended-upgrade, the allowed-origins check applies to both the > downloads and the installation. > > So by default, increases in the download time of non-security SRUs would be > perceivable by the user (though perhaps not of interest). > >> New instance initialization - e.g. spinning up a cloud instance, with >> cloud-init, and installing a bunch of things; deploying juju charm / >> conjure-up spell; configuring things with puppet / ansible / etc => >> these are download & install heavy. However, users that do that >> heavily, will be in a corporate / bussiness / datacentre environment >> and thus it is reasonable to expect them to have either a fat internet >> pipe, and/or a local mirror. Meaning download speed & size, are not >> critical. > > Generally agreed (but the assertion should still be tested, not assumed). > >> Then there are devel series users, developers who do sbuild builds, >> etc. These users are most likely to be on slower home-user connections >> and watch things a lot more closely interactively, who indeed care >> about the total download+install time. These users, are most likely >> very vocal / visible, but are not ultimately the target audience as to >> why we develop Ubuntu in the first place. Thus I would be willing to >> trade personal developer/devel-series user experience, in favor of the >> stable series user. I'm not sure how much it makes sense to >> proxy/cache/local-mirror devel series, if it is only a single machine >> in use. > > I disagree that we don't develop Ubuntu for developers. The developer
That's not the use case I brought up. I said users of the devel series, aka ubuntu+1. The compression vs download trade off, is irrelevant on the ubuntu+1 series, since the churn is so high anyway, that the only way to win, is to not update every transition / archive push, and only dist-upgrade weekly. And optimizing for users of ubuntu+1 is very niche, in comparison to the stable series users. I make no distinction among the stable series users - be that "developers" or "not", they are all simply stable series users. -- Regards, Dimitri. -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel