[Gllug] Apt and RPM caching experiences

[j.roberts]

On 04/07/2011 11:36, John Edwards wrote:

>>> I don't know about Yum/RPM caching, but the default config for Squid
>>> in Debian/Ubuntu is not well tuned for the caching of apt files.
>>>
>>> In particular you need to reduce the lifetime for the various
>>> Packages, Source, Release, Translation and Index files so that
>>> they are refreshed more often (or even not cached). Then increase
>>> the lifetime of the deb files themselves, along with the maximum
>>> object and total cache sizes.

> The usual reasons for a caching is to speed up download on slow links
> or reduce the total monthly transfer. Debian/Ubuntu archives are very
> large and most of the packages transfered will never be used, so you
> will be transfering much more data as well slowing down your Internet
> link.
...

> I think it's more efficient to just transfer those packages you need.

I guess it depends how many machines of a distro one is trying to manage 
at a site and how much application churn there is:

1 - just run updates
10-20 - squid cache makes sense to me, I'm going to try this again
100+ - local full cache is justified

?

Seems reasonable, of course I may well have overlooked something...

MeJ
--
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug