On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 08:51 -0600, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Roberto Ragusa <m...@robertoragusa.it> wrote:
> > Just an idea: instead of (or in addition to) "blind" planning,
> > based on net topology, geography, declared bandwith etc.,
> > yum could use an exploration approach:
> >
> > 1) choose a few good mirrors candidate
> > 2) download one file from each of them (first file from
> > first mirror, second file from second mirror, ....)
> > 3) gather speed statistics
> > 4) reevaluate best mirrors according to statistics for the
> > remaining files
> 
> 
> You're basically describing yum-plugin-fastestmirror.  Of course that
> doesn't get one any sort of parallelism when downloading packages, but
> it answers one of your complaints by rating actual data rates.

 fastestmirror does not do "data download measuring", which the above
implies. It measures latency (via. connect), which is often a good
substitute and has the advantage of being fast enough. But it can do
obviously wrong things, like ignore a local mirror that had a temporary
problem.

 It also uses measured data for upto 10 days, by default.

 So personally I'd prefer to just rely on MirrorManager. But saying all
that a lot of people swear by it, and CentOS (who don't use
MirrorManager) require it.

-- 
James Antill - ja...@fedoraproject.org
http://yum.baseurl.org/wiki/releases
http://yum.baseurl.org/wiki/whatsnew/3.2.26
http://yum.baseurl.org/wiki/YumMultipleMachineCaching
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to