30/11/2022 16:30, Stokes, Ian:
> > Hi Ian,
> > 
> > Cc: Thomas and John
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:52 PM Ian Stokes <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > diff --git a/.ci/linux-build.sh b/.ci/linux-build.sh
> > > index 23c8bbb7a..0aa90e55e 100755
> > > --- a/.ci/linux-build.sh
> > > +++ b/.ci/linux-build.sh
> > > @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ function install_dpdk()
> > >          fi
> > >          # No cache or version mismatch.
> > >          rm -rf dpdk-dir
> > > -        wget https://fast.dpdk.org/rel/dpdk-$1.tar.xz
> > > +        wget https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/snapshot/dpdk-$1.tar.xz
> > >          tar xvf dpdk-$1.tar.xz > /dev/null
> > >          DIR_NAME=$(tar -tf dpdk-$1.tar.xz | head -1 | cut -f1 -d"/")
> > >          mv ${DIR_NAME} dpdk-dir
> > 
> > dpdk.org server experienced a quite heavy load this morning, with many
> > clients requesting git related operations through http.
> > I am not sure what or who triggered this, but I just remembered this patch 
> > here.
> > 
> > Downloading a rc4 tarball through dpdk.org cgit is to be avoided.
> > dpdk.org server does not cache this kind of operations, it is heavy on
> > cpu, memory and bandwidth.
> > 
> > 
> > I think OVS should switch to the github mirror, this would work for
> > both rc and final release tarballs.
> > IOW: wget https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/archive/refs/tags/v$1.tar.gz
> > 
> > One drawback is that github does not seem to provide xz compressed
> > tarballs, so you would need to update the script further.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for the input David, I've posted a v3 but didn’t include this change 
> as I wanted to discuss a bit further. 
> 
> So we use DPDK.org in our ci but we also make reference to its use throughout 
> the OVS documentation when users wish to download DPDK, should this also be 
> replaced with github?
> 
> I guess to my mind if github is the preferred method to retrieve the repo 
> then does it raise the question of dpdk org in general providing the 
> releases? Is there a plan to transition completely to github for DPDK in the 
> future?
> 
> If the preferred method is to go ahead with github then thats OK on my side 
> but I think it would be better to keep that change in a separate patch along 
> with an explanation as to why github should be used rather than dpdk.org as 
> we've been using the current approach for a few years without issue.

fast.dpdk.org is fine and preferred.
git.dpdk.org should not be used for tarball download in general.
github.com/DPDK is OK for tarball download, including release candidates.



_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to