How to setup Peer to Peer on Transact : (was Transact and peer to peer)

[Peter Barker]

On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, Kim Holburn wrote:

> No-one has mentioned the fact that the transact connection is
> asymetric.  10 times.  Not very good for servers.  Why?  Marketing
> decision?  Not technical.

Evil, evil thought.

A parallelised reverse rsync.

Assumptions:
 - Multiple servers, each on a slow link
 - Single client on fast link
 - the servers do _not_ need the same file, but one close would be
nice. You need to designate one server as a "master", though - you get its
version.

1. Client sends to "master" server, "Give me signatures for file <blah>".

2. Client sends to every other server, "These are the signatures for file
<blah>". (If the client has a local copy of a file which is being updated,
it also acts as a "server").

3. Each server (other than the master) sends back a list of blocks it can
supply. The master, presumably, can supply all of them :-)

4. You farm out the work to each of the servers based on how responsive
they seem. Sort of like a worker-farmer algorithm, but with a queue of
outstanding work for each farmer.

Anyone see any flaws?

> Kim

Yours,
-- 
Peter Barker                          |   N    _--_|\ /---- Barham, Vic 
Programmer,Sysadmin,Geek              | W + E /     /\                
pbarker at barker.dropbear.id.au         |   S   \_,--?_*<-- Canberra      
You need a bigger hammer.             |             v    [35S, 149E]   
qq%I've never heard of it or used it, apart from finding it in the Camel
 book and saying "Oh god".% -- Onceler