[wellylug] updating vs bandwidth

[Daniel Pittman]

David Antliff <david.antliff at gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 14:09, Daniel Pittman <daniel at rimspace.net> wrote:
>> David Antliff <david.antliff at gmail.com> writes:
>>> I've been through all this exercise several times in the last ten years with
>>> Debian, Ubuntu and even something similar with Gentoo once.  I've written
>>> rsync scripts, messed around with my own apt proxy, and believe me,
>>> apt-cacher is *the* way to go.
>>
>> FWIW, we dropped that in favour of apt-cacher-ng, since apt-cacher would lock
>> up under sufficient load and stop responding.  Not nice when your production
>> network suddenly all start complaining about being unable to check for
>> updates...

[...]

> Would you agree that apt-cacher(-ng) is probably the best current
> solution to the original problem?

Well, we moved from apt-proxy to apt-cacher to apt-cacher-ng, so my experience
says yes — at least considering that list of options.

        Daniel
-- 
✣ Daniel Pittman            ✉ daniel at rimspace.net            ☎ +61 401 155 707
               ♽ made with 100 percent post-consumer electrons