On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 16:21 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I would love to use kickstart but my peers are directing me to use > images. The perception is that images would deploy faster than > kickstart. Has anyone on this list done any performance measurements of > images verses kickstart or just kickstart performance. For example there > is an old paper documenting system imager installing 1000 nodes in 15 > minutes. I do not have the hardware yet to test performance but I may be > forced to use this method unless I can get numbers to back up my > decision. > > http://wiki.systemimager.org/index.php/BitTorrent#Benchmark >
I think it really depends on your use case. For example. If you're imaging 1000 identical nodes all at once it is quite possible that a torrent-based imager will be faster. However, I'm willing to wager a lot of people here are not imaging 1000 nodes all at once. They're install 5, 10, 15 servers at a time and want a consistent and repeatable install process that allows some variability w/o having to break your back to provide it. Hence, kickstart wins, hands down. -sv _______________________________________________ cobbler mailing list [email protected] https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/cobbler
