[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: up2date, mirror repositories, and performance

On 18 Feb 2004, at 22:16, seth vidal wrote:

Not true, IMO. It requires very little to add a Bittorrent seed to an
existing Apache server (mod_bittorrent, IRC) so why not do it? Sure,
you have a bit of overhead, but it would be worth it. You could even
have a BitTorrent service that runs in the background and shares the

a couple of points -most mirrors don't run apache - it doesn't scale. IT
doesn't work as well as thttpd or boa or tux for LOTS of static files.

so mod_bittorrent is just A BIT of overhead - it's actually quite a lot.

Ok, it would mean running bittorrent alongside thttp. Not a huge drain of resources.

That's the only plausible explanation that I can think of that would
mean BitTorrent would not be efficient (not enough users sharing at one
time - but there will always be at least one - the normal HTTP server).

there is also the problem is that when the .torrent file is a considerable percentage of the total file size.

sorry, but what planet are you from? I downloaded a 350MB file today off bittorrent: Torrent size: 7.1KB. Most of this is hash data, so it scales with filesize. A 10MB file would have a torrent size of around 2KB, if that. It only starts getting into the megabyte zone with multi-gigabyte files.

Also, update filesizes can sometimes be more than 20MB which is more
than reasonable to spread the load with other users.

and I'm not convinced you'll see a boost from 20MB and bittorrent.

Sorry but if it means 20MB that the mirrors don't have to provide (IE: from users upstream connections) it is a huge success IMO.

we need to FIX the mirroring system. It has to be brought under more rigid standards and controls. THAT is how we solve this problem.
Martin Alderson,

Email: martin intechhosting co uk
Web: http://www.intechhosting.co.uk

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]