Well whats the point of the round robin? To distribute load between the two boxes, and cover fail over? To save bandwidth from everyone's point of view I think it would be better to sync one from msync, and sync the other one from the first one. What does everyone else think?
On 10/23/2009 3:22 PM, Bob Bownes wrote:
Dedup....indeed.
So do I need to do anything special if I am going to have two machines (in disparate locations) on a round robin DNS answering to mirror.seiri.com http://mirror.seiri.com (and rsyncing from msync)
I could sync one from the other, but that kinda defeats the round robin point.
iii
2009/10/23 João Carlos Mendes Luís <jonny@jonny.eng.br mailto:jonny@jonny.eng.br>
That's why we really need block level deduplication, ASAP... ;-) Jeff Sheltren wrote: > On Oct 23, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Nick Olsen wrote: > > >> Never Thought of that.... >> I guess your right. >> Don't really see why ISO's shouldn't be carried though. >> > > Disk space. > > Some people (I won't name names, *cough* warthog *cough*) might argue > that having ISO images is simply a replication of the packages we're > already carrying on the mirror and that there should be a better way > to handle stuff so that mirrors don't end up with multiple copies of > what is essentially the same data. > > -Jeff > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-mirror mailing list > CentOS-mirror@centos.org <mailto:CentOS-mirror@centos.org> > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-mirror > _______________________________________________ CentOS-mirror mailing list CentOS-mirror@centos.org <mailto:CentOS-mirror@centos.org> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-mirror
CentOS-mirror mailing list CentOS-mirror@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-mirror