Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Mike McGrath wrote:
Jonathan Steffan wrote:
The amount of storage and bandwidth able to be saved can be illustrated
by a simple comparison between the efficiency of chopping up a 3.4GB
iso9660 file system arbitrarily (by a static chunk size) and the same
file system based on contents (file by file.) For a BitTorrent,
Fedora's current choice for sharing Spins, the hosted data is only
valid for a given chunk on a single ISO. This data's footprint (equal
to the combined chunk sizes of the entire torrent) can be used for
nothing but this Spin. To be able to host 5 Spins composed from similar
trees via BitTorrent, we now have a footprint of 17GB, not to mention
"seeders" have to run BitTorrent software to be able to contribute to
the swarm. Alternatively, Jigdo can be used to reduce the footprint of
these 5 Spins to about 4GB. The amount of additional data needing to be
hosted for each Spin, in addition to what data is already pushed to the
mirrors, is about 150MB per ISO with anaconda and about 200KB for ISOs
without the installer bits. To help illustrate the efficiency of using
Jigdo vs BitTorrent, the footprint for 250 Spins is 850GB for
BitTorrent and about 40GB for Jigdo. Additionally, a reduction in
overhead can be achieved by removing the need for the BitTorrent
tracker and all related network traffic without requiring any
additional work on the part of mirror administrators.
My concern with jigdo is with how many people use it? It seems silly
to host both torrent and jigdo (as much of this letter points out the
benefits of switching to jigdo, those benefits disappear if we simply
add jigdo to the mix. Most people already have bittorrent. Lets say
we were going to give Jigdo a trial run for Fedora 9
FYI, we have done so, and we are doing so officially for Fedora 9.
and we were going to
judge jigdo a success if a certain % (compared to bittorrent) use
jigdo. What % would that be?
Jigdo would in this case be particularly useful to those with a local
mirror as they have 99% of the content already (90% if you have
F9T3?). Because it is particularly useful to some, and completely
weird and strange for others, the number of users that will use it if
BitTorrent is an alternative wouldn't be a very good indicator to see
if it is actually a viable distribution method for the whole of
Fedora, neither is it the goal for these proposals.
I'm talking specifically about people going to the get-fedora page and
clicking on the torrent link vs the jigdo link. Out of every 100
people, how many people will click on the jigdo link?
-Mike
_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
