I'm not sure that network traffic should be a concern even with
uncompressed repos, p2's requests support gzip responses and I
believe most web servers will have gzip enabled by default.
Matthew
On 17/11/2010 1:00 PM, Dean Roberts wrote:
The primary concern
for uncompressed repositories
would be network traffic and to a lesser extent disk footprint.
Dean Roberts, J9 Java Class
Library
Team
IBM Ottawa Lab
613-356-5099
Dean_Roberts@xxxxxxxxxx
Can you be more specific about concerns that
you have?
--
Regards,
Igor
On 10-11-17 10:00 AM, Dean Roberts wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I am trying go get a feel for how widely used
uncompressed metadata
> repositories are.
>
> A typical content.xml file contains many copies of
identical license
> text. Memory use is not an issue since the implementation
uses a
> StringPool to extern string references. Compressed
repositories do
not
> present an issue for disk foot print or network traffic
as the
> content.xml compresses extremely well, typically 95% or
more.
>
> However, uncompressed metadata repositories may pose a
significant
> concern here if they are widely used.
>
> So does anybody have an opinion on how widely used
uncompressed
> repositories are?
>
> Thanks
>
> Dean Roberts, J9 Java Class Library Team
> IBM Ottawa Lab
> 613-356-5099
> Dean_Roberts@xxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2-dev mailing list
> p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
_______________________________________________
p2-dev mailing list
p2-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/p2-dev
|
