From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 29 22:26:46 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D53AACC; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 22:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-x22c.google.com (mail-qc0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB8571D26; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 22:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id c9so3746315qcz.17 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:26:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=joseLMJ3mEDRvvh3Dq19cKLZU8bkI/Bh3r7qW63KqVU=; b=s53f08su9EHZpg4UlmMHVKSMWP5PGtXyQQN/t4nWLKctoz1DXdfiA89yNdso+Op2Sg Y/Jbuo4H++hR7etjZdfIyNM5h1q+Eu6vsI0DTE1d+Tm1R7FQwzwydNkj+iDxPPvDK/bl XTIpTQ+FX/wDF1RXQRmMivcURx0BZfNXXfVbWheHIV+Lq621o5IHameTSIcSbE1xNNAD IABbgZiaB42P8iVDZx0Ps8ZPLwUMJ+oIVeitC6Y+mUF7UIc3Sih5F0WXvzyyTNVREVrY 9Dnjdm/8OBfzQxkNZ+Np97IdfB02SUXyy5Jqc5B14mJUAwcgdvIF5Kqvw9rmqp80J58/ D2IA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.229.13.195 with SMTP id d3mr16560621qca.4.1391034404948; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:26:44 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.224.52.8 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:26:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52E977FB.8020105@freebsd.org> References: <5F09668C-0DEA-4074-A06C-BC4D29F92368@FreeBSD.org> <201401211149.45793.jhb@freebsd.org> <52E2C1BC.10202@allanjude.com> <20140125113236.GX86491@e-new.0x20.net> <1390662664.13404.75208481.39F16B29@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20140129205157.GB86491@e-new.0x20.net> <52E977FB.8020105@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:26:44 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: gXJgjVNH13JvIvsfc5jR0SX2QfY Message-ID: Subject: Re: freebsd-update From: Adrian Chadd To: Colin Percival Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-current , Lars Engels X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 22:26:46 -0000 On 29 January 2014 13:51, Colin Percival wrote: > On 01/29/14 12:51, Lars Engels wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 09:11:04AM -0600, Mark Felder wrote: >>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014, at 5:32, Lars Engels wrote: >>>> Also using freebsd-update behind a proxy is really slow. Even with a >>>> very fast internet connection (normally download rates ca. 3 MBytes / >>>> s) downloading all the tiny binary diff files took more than 8 hours. >>>> Maybe freebsd-update's backend could create a tarball of all those >>>> diffs and provide this? >>> >>> Even streaming the tar instead of waiting for the freebsd-update server >>> to produce the tarball would be an improvement. I have no experience >>> doing that over a WAN but I don't see why it would be unreliable. >> >> Colin, what do you think? Is it possible? > > Anything is *possible*, but given that the number of patches available is > typically at least 10x the number being fetched this doesn't seem like it > would be very efficient. > > FWIW, the performance problems with proxies are limited to HTTP proxies > which don't speak HTTP/1.1. Did you / others ever actually benchmark this? I know that Squid supports pipelined requests but only a handful (defaulting to 1) at a time, as the actual error semantics for HTTP/1.1 pipelining wasn't well defined. So flipping it around - which intermediaries that are actually in use by companies and such actually support pipelining at the level that you're doing it? -a