Re: Fedora Unity release

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Robert L Cochran wrote:
I use jigdo myself and like the way it pulls packages from a list of
servers, so that no one server is stressed with a long download
connection that might be dropped or which might be so busy you can't log
onto it.

The really bad thing about jigdo is that it isn't smart enough by
default to notice that one or more servers consistently have connection
problems, and it keeps hitting them again and again in round-robin
fashion retrying the connection, and that in turn wastes a lot of time.
Jigdo should drop a server after two different sets of two attempts per
set which still fail to connect, and then go on to the next server in
the list.

I would say there are a number of problems with the whole concept.


1 - The downloads do not run in parallel, so the time to download is the sum of all the download times, rather than the sum divided by the number of servers.

2 - any slow servers get totally hammered. If a server is running into bandwidth limits, new requests come in before the first ones finish, raising the load and further reducing bandwidth to any given client. With bittorrent the number of data providers goes up as the load goes up, and because the client will pull more data from the faster servers the average transfer rate to the client is higher.

3 - there doesn't seem to be any benefit to the server for jigdo vs. bittorrent, the load changes from a steady light load to a bursty heavy load per client request. It's not obvious that the same servers serving bittorrent would be any more loaded under any number of clients, but the bandwidth needed would be reduced under heavy load as clients provide part of the outgoing bandwidth.


That's my read on it, when a release first comes out the servers get hammered harder with jigdo than bittorrent. The sole advantage of jigdo is use of protocols which are more likely to be permitted through firewalls, and conceptually allowing a server to have only part of the larger image taking up disk space. I doubt that any machine which can't hold the whole image should be a server anyway, that's just my take on it, opinion rather than fact.

--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
  "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux