From owner-freebsd-hubs Fri May 4 10: 3:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Received: from lab.cyberlifelabs.com (lab.cyberlifelabs.com [208.201.255.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9100037B43C for ; Fri, 4 May 2001 10:03:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from milo@cyberlifelabs.com) Received: (qmail 29654 invoked from network); 4 May 2001 17:03:14 -0000 Received: from win2k.lab.cyberlifelabs.com (HELO win2k) (208.201.255.3) by lab.cyberlifelabs.com with SMTP; 4 May 2001 17:03:14 -0000 From: "Milo Hyson" To: Cc: Subject: RE: ftp-master method Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 10:03:13 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <200105041644.f44GiuO54477@vashon.polstra.com> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org We've been running CVSup for FreeBSD, PostgreSQL and KDE for quite a while now. It does eat up quite a bit of CPU time. A single update across a T1 dropped about 12% of an otherwise idle P2-400. - Milo Hyson CyberLife Labs, LLC -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG [mailto:owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of John Polstra Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 9:45 AM To: hubs@freebsd.org Cc: will@physics.purdue.edu Subject: Re: ftp-master method In article <20010502161330.B5017@casimir.physics.purdue.edu>, Will Andrews wrote: > OK, so people have problems with either mirror/spegla+ftp and rsync. > How about cvsup? I've suggested this a few times myself. I haven't heard any arguments against it, but nobody ever seems to consider it seriously for this application. It wouldn't be hard to try it and find out how well it works. > It uses the rsync algorithm with some optimizations, Well, to be fair, I doubt it compresses quite as well as rsync. (Rsync is tuned better.) But CVSup probably streams better, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was faster overall in terms of elapsed time. > and can be configured to have a maximum number of deletions, and has > several methods of excluding files. It also requires little memory, All true. > although it does hurt when it comes to cpu. Hmm -- maybe, maybe not. It uses a lot of CPU for dealing with RCS files, because it parses them and edits them and generally spends a lot of time grokking them. The rsync algorithm is much simpler, so CVSup's CPU usage should be better for that case. John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hubs" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hubs" in the body of the message