Re: Beta5 now Available

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Beta5 now Available
Date: 2004-11-23 16:48:21
Message-ID: 20041123124501.A41705@ganymede.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Am Montag, 22. November 2004 17:40 schrieb David Fetter:
>> A much slimmed-down bt.postgresql.org is now serving it. :)
>
> Out of curiosity, what purpose does a bittorrent source serve in this case?

I've always just seen it as an alternative option for downloading *shrug*
just like ftp:// or http:// ...

> The download servers have enough bandwidth to serve any client faster than
> the client can take. The traffic on the download servers is not reduced,
> only distributed differently. I don't see any advantage.

Actually, and here is where I exhibit my total lack of knowledge of BT
internals ... my understanding was that each 'client' becomes a 'server'
by the fact that they have it on their machine and running ... so, over
time, the amount of load on the central server would decrease, since new
downloads would come from closer "client machines" ... essentially, a
whole new set of "unofficial mirror sites" for the source code ...

Is this a wrong understanding?

This is David's baby though, not mind :) I don't know much about it, and
based on what little I've read about it (and original discussions),
believe its a more open source 'kazaa/napster', and, as such, works
similar ...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matt 2004-11-23 16:57:19 Re: patch: plpgsql - access records with rec.(expr)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-11-23 16:37:22 Re: another plperl bug