Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> 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 ...
This is essentially true, although it makes a lot more sense for things
that are a lot larger (full ISO's like Linux distributions) and have a
higher desirability than "official" avenues to get to them. That's not
to say that it shouldn't be offered, it's just a niche thing & is
generally time-sensitive (i.e., it does the best when there a lot of
people using it & the time most people use it is when something is "hot
off the presses"). PostgreSQL is sufficiently small and has high enough
availibility that either you won't have to think twice about downloading
through standard avenues or BT won't help you.
--
Jeff Hoffmann
jeff@propertykey.com
