Ivan's XO Field Upgrade Proposal

[John (J5) Palmieri]

On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 12:32 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 12:16 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> > On 6/26/07, Dan Williams <dcbw at redhat.com> wrote:
> > > Downside of this is, as Alex pointed out, it'll load the mesh a _lot_
> > > more than XO->XO updates.
> > 
> > Not necessarily.  Rsync is pretty efficient: we're still basically
> > distributing just (blockwise) diffs.  And we can always do XO-to-XO
> > later: the important thing is to get a rock-solid basis.  The selling
> > point (to me) is the simplicity.  Like I said: its the simplest thing
> > that works.
> 
> I'm not arguing simplicity; just that we have to be aware of the
> implications of having lots of XOs pulling from the server with some
> overlap with this method, but we don't with XO->XO.  We just have to
> make the tradeoffs clear, and understand them.
> 
> Dan
> 
> > I can do some benchmarks if people actually need to see numbers.
> >  --scott
> > 
> 

We Also have to remember the countries want control over when the boxes
update.  At least that was the impression I got at the country meetings.

-- 
John (J5) Palmieri <johnp at redhat.com>