On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 02:02:31AM +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
16.04.2012 00:51, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:16:58PM +0400, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
>>As I look it for me for first glance.
>>Install or update one package scenario (yum install foo):
>>1) Client ask last foo package version.
>>2) Server calculate all dependencies by self algorithms and return in
>>requested form (several may be used from JSON to XML) full list of
>>dependencies for that package. No other overhead provided like
>>dependencies of all packages, filelist etc.
>>3) Client got it, intercept with current installed packages list,
>>exclude whats already satisfy needs, and then request each other what
>>does not present starting from 1.
>>Update scenario (yum update):
>>1) Client ask repo-server to get a list of actual versions available
>>2) Server answer it.
>>3) Client found which updated and request its as in first scenario
>I don't think this would be a speedup. Instead of the CPUs of tens of
>thousands of computers doing the depsolving, you'd be requiring the CPUs of
>a single site to do it.
Yes. And as many clients do the same work, caching will give there
good results. So, sequence requests will costs nothing.
No. Most requests will be different because they have a different initial
> The clients would have to upload, the provides of
>their installed packages so bandwidth needs might increase. If I was
>installing a few packages by trial and error/memory I'd likely do yum
>install tmux followed closely by yum install zsh, which would require
>separate requests to the server to download separate dependency information
>as opposed to having the information downloaded once.
If you request yum install tmux zsh off course it should be sent and
calculated on server in one request.
Also caching answers on client side not forbidden.
But I was saying that I often do yum install zsh followed by yum install
tmux as I notice things that I've forgotten to install on a machine I'm
starting to work on. Similarly, yum install libfoo-devel followed by yum
install libbar-devel as I'm pulling the dependencies for a new piece of
software I'm building or developing. Caching on the client won't help if
what we're caching is only a partial piece of the repodata.
> The server that
>constructs the subsets of repodata would become single point of failures
>whereas currently the repodata can be hosted on any mirror. This setup
>would be much more sensitive to mirrors and repodata going out of sync.
>There'd likely be times when a new push has gone out where the primary
>mirror was the only server which could push packages out as every other
>mirror would be out of sync wrt the repodata server.
Yes, as I wrote initially it introduce more requirements to the
server, especially some sort of scripting allowed (php, perl, python,
ruby or other).
But at all it is not exclude mirroring as it is free software and any
ma install it, and sync metadata information in traditional way.
If you're requiring that mirrors run the script on their systems, then
that makes this idea pretty much a non-starter. We've been told by mirrors
that they do not want to do this.