You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#1 2012-12-16 03:53:41
- kraxor
- Member
- From: Szeged, Hungary
- Registered: 2010-10-30
- Posts: 12
Choosing mirror: HTTP or FTP?
Hi,
I just saw some statistics showing about 83% of arch users use HTTP mirrors and 17% go with FTP. I was wondering, is there any actual difference from the user's point of view, or is it just a technical choice made by the mirror site? Not asking for information on the protocols themselves, just interested if one may have an advantage over the other.
Thanks!
Offline
#2 2012-12-16 04:00:24
- WonderWoofy
- Member
- From: Los Gatos, CA
- Registered: 2012-05-19
- Posts: 8,414
Re: Choosing mirror: HTTP or FTP?
Take a look at the mirrorlist that is shipped with pacman-mirrorlist, and tell me what you see there.
To use an ftp mirror, you have to add them yourself. There are easy ways to do this, but it is also pretty easy to just use the shipped mirrorlist.
Offline
#3 2012-12-16 04:13:05
- brebs
- Member
- Registered: 2007-04-03
- Posts: 3,742
Re: Choosing mirror: HTTP or FTP?
is there any actual difference from the user's point of view
In my experience of distro mirrors, HTTP tends to be faster. I assume this is because FTP has more overhead for the server, e.g. nasty port usage.
Offline
#4 2012-12-16 21:54:15
- fukawi2
- Ex-Administratorino
- From: .vic.au
- Registered: 2007-09-28
- Posts: 6,237
- Website
Re: Choosing mirror: HTTP or FTP?
IMHO, using HTTP is better. It's usually easier to get it through firewalls, as well as having the ability to issue more useful responses than FTP (eg, 304 Not Modified or 3xx Redirects)
Oh, and of course, FTP Must Die anyway.
Last edited by fukawi2 (2012-12-16 21:55:00)
Are you familiar with our Forum Rules, and How To Ask Questions The Smart Way?
BlueHackers // fscanary // resticctl
Offline