From owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 2 10:12:49 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E5EC16A415 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2006 10:12:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ftpmaint@proxad.net) Received: from fanfan.staff.proxad.net (fanfan.staff.proxad.net [213.228.1.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2865643D5F for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2006 10:12:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ftpmaint@proxad.net) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fanfan.staff.proxad.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87DF335A735; Thu, 2 Nov 2006 11:12:47 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4549C49F.4090109@proxad.net> Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:12:47 +0100 From: Francois Petillon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Debian/1.7.8-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org References: <004701c6fdf6$28f40260$0201a8c0@blip> In-Reply-To: <004701c6fdf6$28f40260$0201a8c0@blip> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Subject: Re: ISO downloads with multiple mirrors for higher reliabilty, automatic checksum verification X-BeenThere: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "FreeBSD Distributions Hubs: mail sup ftp" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 10:12:49 -0000 Anthony L. Bryan wrote: > I've made Metalinks for a few FreeBSD ISOs: > http://www.metalinker.org/samples/FreeBSD_6_2-BETA3-amd64-bootonly_iso.metal > ink As these Metalinks are not officials, would it be possible to remove ftp.fr.freebsd.org from these files ? I do not want to support nor promote an "open standard" that encourage software to do parallel segmented downloads. I have several problems with segmented downloads. As software open several connections (it may be several connections on a single server or single connections on several servers, the result is the same), servers will serve more connections and will have less memory usable per connection. As one of the biggest problem on servers is related to disks IO optimizations, less memory may lead to smaller block reads (and thus higher disk load). Even if the server has enough memory, as the file are requested by segments, you are disabling on the server the ability to fully optimize its disk requests. Last but not the least (and it does not concern bittorent downloads, only servers), if you do not download at max speed, it means there is a _real_ bottleneck. It may be on the server, it may be on the network but speeding up download by using segmented downloads will not create bandwidth, you will just steal bandwidth to other people. François