Your message dated Sun, 2 Mar 2008 14:11:50 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Re: control over order of mirroring would be useful
has caused the Debian Bug report #29779,
regarding control over order of mirroring would be useful
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
immediately.)
--
29779: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=29779
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: rsync
Version: 2.2.0-1
Severity: wishlist
It would be useful if rsync gave you the ability to order the
mirroring process. A simple scheme, which would solve some
problems with the Debian mirrors, would allow you to specify the
order of the uploading of new files, modified files and deleting
of files.
The reason this would help Debian is that it would minimize the
time that mirrors of the archive are inconsistent. By having new
files mirrored, then modfied files and files deleted only at the
end, the archive would be inconsistent only for the short period
of time it took to update the modified files (which would include
Packages files).
The current system of deleting files first is the worst thing
for us. To accomplish the same thing now would take three
passes of rsync(*) which is unacceptable given the load it takes
to retrieve the file list.
Jay Treacy
(*) first pass would --exlude the Package files, the second would
mirror the Package files and the third would use --delete
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon 25 Apr 2005, Paul Slootman wrote:
>
> There's now a --delete-after option, which should help a lot.
> I'd suggest first rsyncing the packages themselves, then doing the
> Packages files. As the Packages are in a different directory tree from
> the packages themselves (dists/ and pool/), this should no longer be a
> problem. (I realize that the pool wasn't (fully?) in use back in 1998.)
IMHO the --delete-after should be enough for the needs described in the
original bug report; now closing this 5-digit bug report :-)
Paul Slootman
--- End Message ---
