On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 10:31:11 AM CDT Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 11 May 2016 at 10:21, Dennis Gilmore <dennis@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > -1 > > > > It is not a good solution. > > What is your alternative? Sorry but coming in a week later with a -1 > needs more than a 1 sentence. We have backend storage which is > increasingly having to be turned down because the rsync enchilada is > causing major issues with other users. We have many mirrors who can't > get in-sync with the mirrors because the level 1 and level 2 mirrors > are not able to finish an rsync from the download servers. I am trying to catch up with email from the last week or so, I am still 13000 behind, So I did not catch this. this only works if you do not care about hardlinking, which is going to mean that people are using an extra 500G + of disk on the mirrors. An issue some mirrors have hit due to what I am assuming are bad mirroring practices. the only way to fix it properly is going to mean re-evaluating how we push content and how we message the pushing, and having tooling to either do push mirroring or enabling intelligent pull based mirroring, including information about whats hardlinked where and what content we have pushed. this is like a bandaid when the sore under it is still festering away. Dennis
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
