different delivery formats
Daniel P. Berrange
berrange at redhat.com
Mon Feb 13 10:36:55 UTC 2012
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 02:27:10AM +0100, Alan Pevec wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis at ausil.us> wrote:
> > I made a qcow2 format image for f17 that came
> > in at 610M, i also tarred and xz compressed the f16 ec2 raw disk and
> > that came in at 114M the raw disk images are 10G
> For testing in Openstack Glance, I'd prefer to point users directly to
> the compressed qcow2 image, instead of giving them complicated
> instructions this:
> I've attached patches for appliance-creator (tested) and koji
> (untested) which add --compress option, could you please try them out?
> > so the main question here is whats the best way to make them available
> > that can easily be consumed by people.
> If it is too big for mirrors, then publish it at
> http://torrent.fedoraproject.org/ ?
I have a hard time accepting the argument that cloud disk images would
be too big for mirrors. We're talking 100-200 MB per disk image typical.
Even if we provided 3 formats, in two architectures we'd almost certainly
be less than 1 GB in total size.
Now look at Fedora 16 updates directory - 12 GB for x86_64, 12 GB for
i386, and 9 GB for SRPMs. So that's 33 GB of RPMs for Updates alone.
Now the base release was another 73 GB. So for just RPMs, for 1 release
of Fedora we're talking 100 GB.
Our cloud images would be a mere 1% of the total Fedora size mirrors
have to carry per release.
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
More information about the cloud