On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 12:46:16PM -0400, Robert G. Brown wrote: > On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Hedemark, Magnus wrote: > > > RGB said: > > > > > There are probably ways to cut this down in an emergency (a serious > > > exploit, for example, that needs to be corked in 36 hours or > > > less at the > > > client level). > > > > Have the primary site push/initiate the rsync to the T1, and the T1 initiate > > the rsync to T2 in an emergency. T3's are on their own to fetch from T2's. > > That should have an incredible boost in how quickly packages get to the T3's > > and then to the end node. > > Ah, but this violates the first principle of scalable distribution -- > client pull, never server push. Pulling is a client initiated action Separate the data transfer which should still be pull from the notification layer which can be push based (email sounds just fine to propagate to a registered set of mirrors at level N+1). Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/ veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
