On 19:13 Tue 14 Sep , C Anthony Risinger wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Nathan Wayde <disposaboy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > here's what I'd(and I imagine most others who know about sharing the cache) > > use a local mirror for: > > > > to be able to sync all other systems from it. plain and simple. if my > > systems don't have internet connection or something like that then i simply > > get the packages from the master, > > cache sharing doesn't and cannot solve that problem at all, that's a fact. > > shared cache won't solve that sure... but there are better solutions: > > ) if you can get it from master, then it sounds like you have a LAN > connection; tunnel a connection thru master... > ) if you have a LAN, what can't some machines have access anyway? > ) if you don't have a LAN, you are manually moving packages? you > could do that without a local mirror > ) if you have a LAN, but _cannot_ allow some access to the net, then > use a different method like a caching proxy > > local mirror = quick/easy crutch to avoid better utilization of > local/peer resources > > i use a homebrew proxy/cache solution for my home, works fine. one > machine pretends to be a repo, others look to it for packages... easy. > i'm not using this exact version now, but i implemented this (rather > crappily) while first learning python: > > "pacproxy (or something that vaguely resembles an apt-proxy clone)" > https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=87115 > > > now to the bandwidth issue. it's obviously bogus, because: > > > > 1) they assume everyone/(lots of people) is going to create a local mirror. > > 2) they assume that they're all going to sync from the same server. > > 3) they assume this extra bandwidth waste actually causes a problem for all > > the mirrors - i.e that there's only 1 mirror. > > > > now, if my assumptions are wrong thus leading to false conclusions then > > please correct me, but so far all I've heard is whining about local mirror > > causing problems for the mirrors but nothing about what these problems > > actually are, in the meantime the original wiki was deemed bad with not much > > of a valid reason and nothing being done to further educate us the users. > > i don't think it's even about whether or not it _is_ causing a > problem, and more a preemptive move to discourage naive > implementations. sure, if you have a heterogeneous environment of 200 > machines, then a local mirror probably isn't too bad an idea... but it > still isn't needed, as faster/better/cheaper methods are available. > > in my opinion, if you're not publicly seeding your mirror, then you > don't need it; else you probably only want it due to an extreme case > of laziness. sure maybe mirror XYZ can handle constant sync's from > everyone looking at it... but really, do them a favor, and don't; it > might piss them off :-). > > > You can probably tell that I'm annoyed by this and the simple fact is that > > ARM sync script was based off the script on that wiki, it's not the same as > > I changed a lot of options to cater to my own needs but as have been said > > the script was bad, no-one is telling us what was bad about it and these > > alternative methods are wholly inadequate at best. > > yeah i don't really know the politics here, or have even seen the > script. in my own experience back in the day syncing ubuntu repos > (for easy install at remote locations from large USB key when client > requirements are unknown)... you likely flat out don't need it, and > there are _very_ few legitimate use cases for it (the parenthesized > use case above is about the best one i know). > > all i'm suggesting is that just because you can and it's easy doesn't > mean you should. but hey, i don't run a mirror, and extreme leeching > won't affect me, so ultimately i could care less; if i did though, i > would monitor for this kind of crap... i mean, doesn't the official > arch mirror impose similar restrictions? just do you part to not be > excessive. > > does one check out the entire library on the possibility of reading 10 books? > > C Anthony I think, i know(and others, who use this method) better what i'm doing, and why i am doing it. So, i tell you once more - community think, that this is useful. People, who say "Hey, man! I have server, and rsync installed, add me please to the list of 3rd party mirrors" know what they do. If they offer this service - they think it helps. If they would have 'tiny pipe'(or something else tiny) they wouldn't do it. So, i still don't understand why opinion of community ignored. --
