Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:26:44 -0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Lars Engels <lars.engels@0x20.net> Subject: Re: freebsd-update Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmok0YWPaipH9_3wxwei6yH33fa2LHhn=RB_7XDHgy%2Bof_Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <52E977FB.8020105@freebsd.org> References: <lblts0$9o1$1@ger.gmane.org> <CAJ5UdcO6V_YnyoJSA=JRL_D7vFzZ8yXcKnh2QcjNQDskbpE98w@mail.gmail.com> <5F09668C-0DEA-4074-A06C-BC4D29F92368@FreeBSD.org> <201401211149.45793.jhb@freebsd.org> <CAN6yY1uiNcWPuJL=O6osDhZci_YBXe7tRW0Nt_cUy25cCTbALQ@mail.gmail.com> <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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29 January 2014 13:51, Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmok0YWPaipH9_3wxwei6yH33fa2LHhn=RB_7XDHgy%2Bof_Q>