On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 10:40 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 10:21 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 08:32, Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 08:54 -0400, William Hooper wrote:
> > > > Rsync only imposes that load the once or twice a month you sync, not every
> > > > time a machine does a "yum update".
> > >
> > > Exactly! He seems to also fail to understand that there is a
> > > significant "cost savings" for _all_ parties to rsync the YUM
> > > repository.
> >
> > The only reason there is even a possible savings is that yum circumvents
> > standard http/ftp caching practices by randomizing the source locations.
> > Even then, you'd have to update a vast number of server-type machines to
> > make up for the fact that rsync'ing the repository is going to pull
> > copies of updates for a gazillion programs that no machine has
> > installed.
> >
> Yum doesn't do that at all ... we at CentOS do it on purpose.
>
> We can't possibly provide access by one server to all the CentOS users
> who want to do updates. We transmit more than 18 TB of data per month
> for updates and rsyncs ... so we use something called rrdns (round robin
> DNS) to create mirror.centos.org (or us-mirror and eu-mirror) for yum,
> and msync.centos.org(or us-msync, eu-msync) for rsync. Those names all
> have multiple machines that respond in a round robin way to requests.
>
One thing I wanted to point out though, since one name is used (ie,
mirror.centos.org)... most caching proxy servers would cache the
results.
> That way, we can utilize many different servers to provide CentOS yum
> and rsync servers.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050909/620790de/attachment.bin
