Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > Why there isn't there already a rsync method for apt is probably a > > mystery nobody ever will solve. > > It is not wanted due to rsync causing excessive server load. > That is simply not true. This statement is repeated all the time but nobody ever was able to show hard figures.
Where rsync produces much load is during the phase when it collects all the files for synchronisation and not during MD5 computation but this is is only due to not well designed scripts. DpartialMirror doesn't impose this phase since it only require single-file transfers and does the file collecting phase on the client. > New versions. The size of the Packages files is comparatively tiny > compared to all the debs. Even the 1% saving for rsyncing debs is > hardly worth it due to the extra traffic for the checksums and the > server load it causes. > Sorry rsync reports the overall use, incl. checksums etc. Of course 1% saving doesn't make much sense so that's the main reason I don't develop DpartialMirror further. Anyway the next time a distribution concept is designed it will be based on a p2p solution. > zsync has the option of looking into gziped files and rsync them as if > they would be ungziped (while still just downloading chunks of the > gziped file). Its a bit more complex algorithm but works even better > than rsyncable files and rsync. > As long as zsync allows multi-file transfers it won't be better that rsync. O. Wyss -- Development of frame buffer drivers: http://linux-fbdev.sf.net Sample code snippets for wxWidgets: http://wxcode.sf.net How to build well-designed applications: http://wxguide.sf.net Desktop with a consistent look and feel: http://wyodesktop.sf.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
