On Wed, 2007-07-11 at 23:47 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Alexander, > > I should mention that doing better than rsync with a custom solution > is not unexpected. rsync tries to be fairly general purpose, and > special purpose delta tools can almost always do better, as they can > take advantage of more information about the data.
Well, what we're more concerned about is spreading around the load of updates, both from a network traffic perspective and a server-utilization perspective than any type of "beating" of rsync. More of a peer-to-peer model using standard protocols like HTTP. Nothing against rsync, it's quite appropriate for a centrally-managed system with fairly reliable network connections, but that's not the problem that updatinator is actually attempting to solve... different approaches to the same problem really. Dan > At least rsync provides a harder target to beat than scp or ftp would, > so its useful in that way :-) > > One thing to watch is round trips. Large numbers of http GET requests > means lots of round trips. rsync uses very few round trips, so it > tends to do well on high latency links. > > Cheers, Tridge > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
