From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263375AbUE1PD1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2004 11:03:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263380AbUE1PD1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2004 11:03:27 -0400 Received: from thunk.org ([140.239.227.29]:49638 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263375AbUE1PD0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2004 11:03:26 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 11:01:19 -0400 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: Chris Shoemaker Cc: Mark Watts , Linux Kernel Mail List Subject: Re: ftp.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040528150119.GE18449@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Ts'o , Chris Shoemaker , Mark Watts , Linux Kernel Mail List References: <200405280941.38784.m.watts@eris.qinetiq.com> <20040528062141.GA18118@cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040528062141.GA18118@cox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 02:21:41AM -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > > Agreed - fmirror is so much more reliable than rsync (imho) that it makes > > rsync into a worst-case option for retrieving files. > > bug reports to rsync@lists.samba.org are appreciated... > The main problem with rsync that I can see is that it is fairly heavy weight on the server, so many servers (including mirrors.kernel.org) have a maximum number of connections set to something pathetically small, like say 5 connections. I remember Tridge trying to get someone to implement checksum caching for rsync servers some 4+ years ago, which would surely help. Did that ever get done? If so, convincing the server admins that it's OK to up the maximum number of rsync connections would be the next step. - Ted