Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Printable version Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
se7enOffline
Post subject: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 02:38



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 164

Status: Offline
anybody any idea if that worth trying?
Having a terrible slow internet connection I would be willing to try. But not at the costs of borking my system.
http://www.mattparnell.com/projects/apt ... rades.html
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
HeSaidOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 03:32
Moderator


Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 56
Location: southwest Florida, USA
Status: Offline
Moved topic to the category where it best fits.
--
Neal

_________________
Registered Linux User # 159445
aptosid 64-bit Lenovo Thinkpad Edge
aptosid 64-bit HP dv6000 laptop
aptosid 32-bit eeePC 900A
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
HeSaidOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 03:47
Moderator


Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 56
Location: southwest Florida, USA
Status: Offline
If I were dealing with a slow internet connection I would probably give it a try. The apt-fast script looks straightforward to me, and, according to the axel page on alioth, there are no dependencies. Both should be simple to remove and leave no cruft behind.

I am not a skilled script writer nor a programmer, just a long time Linux user with an adventurous streak. Smile
--
Neal

_________________
Registered Linux User # 159445
aptosid 64-bit Lenovo Thinkpad Edge
aptosid 64-bit HP dv6000 laptop
aptosid 32-bit eeePC 900A
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
ibgbOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 04:26



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 42

Status: Offline
      HeSaid wrote:
Both should be simple to remove and leave no cruft behind.

Well, the script is creating and leaving a file in /var/cache/apt/archives/ instead of putting the file in temp and cleaning up after itself on exit. Shocked

In my limited experience, I've found axel to be nice and capable, but I've never had a connection where it was considerably faster than a normal, single threaded download.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
DonKultOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 13:52
Team Member


Joined: 2010-09-02
Posts: 481

Status: Offline
The scripts aren't new, you can do it with wget as well. The thing is that they are barely useful.

Imagine a highway between your computer and the server serving your download requests which serves also other people. Everything is fine if all cars can drive with lets say 130 km/h over the highway. It gets harder if more and more people start to drive on this highway so more and more cars are driving there and soon begin a stop and go ending in a traffic jam: The solution these scripts provide is to send MORE cars from you over the highway. So, in the same time more cars from you get through the jam to the destination - its just that more people will start using the script so the advantage vanishes and all what is left is that the highway is overcrowded…

Its really better to search for a faster highway than trying to use the already crowded highway even more…

_________________
MfG. DonKult
"I never make stupid mistakes. Only very, very clever ones." ~ The Doctor
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
slhOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 14:22



Joined: 2010-08-25
Posts: 724

Status: Offline
...and if it's not the server being slow (Debian and aptosid have enough mirrors, pick the best for you), overcrowding your narrow connection will even degrade performance even more (there is a per-connection overhead and ACKs need to come through as well).
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
se7enOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 15:38



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 164

Status: Offline
Question was will it break my system and that seams not to be the case.
I did tests wget vs axel and axel downloads faster. And by the way I never used kget but kget is also a lot faster than wget.
I use the debian mirror in Thailand and aptosid's Taiwan mirror is up again.
So I will give it a try.

_________________
Don't mention the war!
Meine Meinung steht fest! Bitte verwirren Sie mich nicht mit Tatsachen!
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
piperOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 26.10.2010, 21:34
Moderator


Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 480
Location: cheektowaga, ny
Status: Offline
      Quote:

I did tests wget vs axel and axel downloads faster.


All my tests were the same results as yours, and I have used axel for years, love the app, works well, never had a problem with it, (axel by itself that is) however, I have yet to test apt-fast, perhaps this weekend I will give it a go Wink

It *should* not break your system
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
phenOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 27.10.2010, 01:39



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 27

Status: Offline
Apologizes if my question was stupid and ignorant, but.. if I had a hypothetical download speed of say 50kb/s at max for instance, would there be a difference if I downloaded by 50kb/s single threaded, or if I would download in 2 threads by simultaneous 25kb/s ? (My point is that the host I download from offers a way higher speed anyway)?
Or am I thinking too superficially/ ignorantly?

Just still wondering about the point of this thread...
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
se7enOffline
Post subject: RE: apt-fast?  PostPosted: 27.10.2010, 02:24



Joined: 2010-09-11
Posts: 164

Status: Offline
@phen, than you are lucky and don't need to worry.

Me on the other hand have a maximum of 25kb/s which I only get if it is Friday the 13th and fullmoon ...
apt-get gave me in several test yesterday a download speed of max 5kb/s. I have seen 10kb/s on some days but never higher.
apt-fast 15kb/s which is not 26 times faster but I can live with 3 times faster.
I will do further testing.
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
ikeinthaiOffline
Post subject: forget asian mirrors.  PostPosted: 27.10.2010, 11:30



Joined: 2010-09-22
Posts: 119
Location: bigannastybkk
Status: Offline
      se7en wrote:
Me on the other hand have a maximum of 25kb/s which I only get if it is Friday the 13th and fullmoon ...


@se7en: have you tried mirrors other than the asian ones?

i never had any luck with any asian mirror. it might be counter-intuitive, but me, here in bangkok, with some of the german and austrian mirrors i get 150-450mb/s download speeds. i realize you are out on an island at the very end of the pipe, with what sounds like an ungodly amount of internetshops percapita... but as i say, i never found any asian mirror that gave me even HALF the speed of the above named... usually more like 30%.

i'd also like to try that italian mirror... italian means fast, right?

all the best, ike.

_________________
aptosid: magic in action, the point of the spear. bleedin pearls before swine? lets hope not. freesoftware/freedomsoftware=a chance at freedom. participants, engage your vehicle. . . avatar by zenren
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
sx9Offline
Post subject: RE: forget asian mirrors.  PostPosted: 27.10.2010, 21:09



Joined: 2010-09-12
Posts: 219
Location: Wiesbaden,Germany
Status: Offline
      Quote:

with some of the german and austrian mirrors i get 150-450mb/s download speeds.


Uhm... max. 450 Megabit/s is pretty cool, but I think you mean kbit, aren't you?
250Mbit/s is the theoretically possible speed limit of VDSL2!

_________________
My new self-made computer:
Intel Core i7-2600k
ASUS Maximus IV Gene-Z (Mainboard)
2x4GB DDR3 RAM
ATI Radeon HD 6770
OCZ Vertex 3 60GB (SSD)
Western Digital Caviar Green WD20EARX 2TB (HDD)
...
aptosid x86_64
 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger  
Reply with quote Back to top
ikeinthaiOffline
Post subject: whoops!  PostPosted: 28.10.2010, 08:55



Joined: 2010-09-22
Posts: 119
Location: bigannastybkk
Status: Offline
      sx9 wrote:
Uhm... max. 450 Megabit/s is pretty cool, but I think you mean kbit, aren't you?
250Mbit/s is the theoretically possible speed limit of VDSL2!


uh, yeah, sorry kbs.

@se7en... another tip for speed is always use the http link for dist-upgrades. i believe DonKult said apt-get doesn't like ftp.

_________________
aptosid: magic in action, the point of the spear. bleedin pearls before swine? lets hope not. freesoftware/freedomsoftware=a chance at freedom. participants, engage your vehicle. . . avatar by zenren
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
DonKultOffline
Post subject: Re: whoops!  PostPosted: 28.10.2010, 14:39
Team Member


Joined: 2010-09-02
Posts: 481

Status: Offline
      ikeinthai wrote:
@se7en... another tip for speed is always use the http link for dist-upgrades. i believe DonKult said apt-get doesn't like ftp.


Yeap, i said that somewhere sometime. Wink Despite that ftp stands for "file transfer protocol" its slower/less useful in pushing files over the wire, given that it doesn't support some things like pipelining which HTTP1.1 does and APT uses a lot (which most scripts doesn't support, so they are better able to hammer a server down with multiple requests instead of requesting them all at once…).

Just to conclude this thread: A downloader can't download stuff faster than another: He can only work with the stuff he gets over the wire - it all depends on how he requests stuff. APT downloads by saying: Hi server, i need file 1, 2, 3 and 4, please send them to me and the server will respond with file 1, 2, 3 and 4 in order. Many scripts start e.g. four different processes each of these requesting a file. The server now needs to server four requests at the same time.
The later can be (not must!) faster if the server is already under pressure as you are not the only one requesting files (Remember the traffic jam solved by adding more own cars to the jam).

If the server is "free" he can serve your requests in full speed in which case APT will be faster as it needs less communication with the server than the scripts with their independent running downloaders (slh mentioned it already).

So, as said: The conclusion is to use the best available server for you and be done with it.

In general i would recommend reading about how "the internet works" internally to understand in deep what i (and slh) are talking about here…

_________________
MfG. DonKult
"I never make stupid mistakes. Only very, very clever ones." ~ The Doctor
 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
Reply with quote Back to top
iotakaOffline
Post subject:   PostPosted: 29.10.2010, 15:14



Joined: 2010-10-06
Posts: 11

Status: Offline
And use apt-cacher-ng? For work we use it, and it work fine. With it you can download only the first time a package and the next time that you use it is already in the cache.

If you have only a PC is not useful but with 2 ore more installation it rocks Wink
 
 View user's profile Send private message  
Reply with quote Back to top
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are GMT - 12 Hours
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Printable version Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Powered by Zafenio