Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 25 Mar 2009 00:23:25 -0700
From:      perryh@pluto.rain.com
To:        pav@freebsd.org
Cc:        brian@brianwhalen.net, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: HEADS UP multi processor compilations and packages
Message-ID:  <49c9dbed.5TBY4hi2jHXQa51x%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
In-Reply-To: <1237921844.44701.3.camel@hood.oook.cz>
References:  <1237901632.1849.19.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <49C92F95.3090601@brianwhalen.net> <1237921844.44701.3.camel@hood.oook.cz>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pav Lucistnik <pav@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Brian Whalen p??e v ?t 24. 03. 2009 v 12:08 -0700:
> > On a related topic, I wonder what the cost would be of acquiring
> > enough hardware so that the probability of actually getting a
> > package with portupgrade -aP would go up substantially ...
>
> It's more a question of creating a new delivery platform, because
> the currently used ftp mirrorring is useless for packages. The
> whole process of synchronizing from upstream server introduces
> _days_ of delay into the process,

presumably addressable by adding bandwidth, which would need to
be included in "the cost ... of acquiring enough hardware ..."

> and there is no guarantee that you don't catch an upload in
> progress, which renders whole mirror useless for a time period.

I would have thought that judicious use of snapshots could avoid
problems with in-progress updates.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49c9dbed.5TBY4hi2jHXQa51x%perryh>