1:31 p.m.
Hey all,
Fedora 26 Beta has been staged and should now be available at
pub/fedora/linux/releases/test/26_Beta/
pub/alt/releases/test/26_Beta/
pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/26_Beta/
it is 248G in pub/fedora, 34G in pub/alt, 274G in pub/fedora-secondary
and the rpms are
hardlinked to pub/fedora/linux/development/26/Everything/
Our release is Tuesday the 13th of June 2017, at 14:00 UTC.
Thank you,
Mohan Boddu.
2:26 p.m.
Hello,
and when Fedora 22 and 23 will be removed?
My mirror is at 94% of storage space and I think I don't need to upgrade,
if old Fedoras will be removed.
Can somebody please move Fedora 23- to archive?
SAL
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 02:31:53PM -0400, Mohan Boddu wrote:
Hey all,
Fedora 26 Beta has been staged and should now be available at
pub/fedora/linux/releases/test/26_Beta/
pub/alt/releases/test/26_Beta/
pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/26_Beta/
it is 248G in pub/fedora, 34G in pub/alt, 274G in pub/fedora-secondary
and the rpms are
hardlinked to pub/fedora/linux/development/26/Everything/
Our release is Tuesday the 13th of June 2017, at 14:00 UTC.
Thank you,
Mohan Boddu.
_______________________________________________
Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
9:57 a.m.
OK it looks like 10 months ago, release engineering changed how many
archives they would keep on the mirrors due to other requests for the
few sites mirroring archives getting hit hard when we moved stuff
over.
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6467
So currently Fedora 22 will be moved to archives after F26 is
released. I am going to say mea culpa on my part as I had heard about
it but didn't put 2 and 2 together until these emails came into the
list. This should have been announced better and better documented as
expecting everyone to know what is in every release tracker is not
scalable.
On 9 June 2017 at 15:26, Ján ONDREJ (SAL) <ondrejj(a)salstar.sk> wrote:
Hello,
and when Fedora 22 and 23 will be removed?
My mirror is at 94% of storage space and I think I don't need to upgrade,
if old Fedoras will be removed.
Can somebody please move Fedora 23- to archive?
SAL
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 02:31:53PM -0400, Mohan Boddu wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Fedora 26 Beta has been staged and should now be available at
>
> pub/fedora/linux/releases/test/26_Beta/
> pub/alt/releases/test/26_Beta/
> pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/26_Beta/
>
> it is 248G in pub/fedora, 34G in pub/alt, 274G in pub/fedora-secondary
> and the rpms are
> hardlinked to pub/fedora/linux/development/26/Everything/
>
> Our release is Tuesday the 13th of June 2017, at 14:00 UTC.
>
> Thank you,
> Mohan Boddu.
> _______________________________________________
> Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
_______________________________________________
Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
10:31 a.m.
Hello,
my myrror (ftp.upjs.sk) has currently only aprox. 100 GB free space.
Is this really needed? Why it's good to hold 630 GB of obsolete systems?
There are no updates for Fedora 22/23, so servers will not download
normal data. Every user should update. If somebody leave it a bit longer,
then archive mirror will be still useable.
Is there anyone else who agree with me?
Jan ONDREJ (SAL)
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:57:30AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> OK it looks like 10 months ago, release engineering changed how many
> archives they would keep on the mirrors due to other requests for the
> few sites mirroring archives getting hit hard when we moved stuff
> over.
>
> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6467
>
> So currently Fedora 22 will be moved to archives after F26 is
> released. I am going to say mea culpa on my part as I had heard about
> it but didn't put 2 and 2 together until these emails came into the
> list. This should have been announced better and better documented as
> expecting everyone to know what is in every release tracker is not
> scalable.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9 June 2017 at 15:26, Ján ONDREJ (SAL) <ondrejj(a)salstar.sk> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > and when Fedora 22 and 23 will be removed?
> > My mirror is at 94% of storage space and I think I don't need to upgrade,
> > if old Fedoras will be removed.
> >
> > Can somebody please move Fedora 23- to archive?
> >
> > SAL
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 02:31:53PM -0400, Mohan Boddu wrote:
> >> Hey all,
> >>
> >> Fedora 26 Beta has been staged and should now be available at
> >>
> >> pub/fedora/linux/releases/test/26_Beta/
> >> pub/alt/releases/test/26_Beta/
> >> pub/fedora-secondary/releases/test/26_Beta/
> >>
> >> it is 248G in pub/fedora, 34G in pub/alt, 274G in pub/fedora-secondary
> >> and the rpms are
> >> hardlinked to pub/fedora/linux/development/26/Everything/
> >>
> >> Our release is Tuesday the 13th of June 2017, at 14:00 UTC.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> Mohan Boddu.
> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>
>
>
> --
> Stephen J Smoogen.
>
10:36 a.m.
On 21.06.2017 16:31, Ján ONDREJ wrote:
Hello,
my myrror (ftp.upjs.sk) has currently only aprox. 100 GB free
space.
Is this really needed? Why it's good to hold 630 GB of obsolete
systems?
There are no updates for Fedora 22/23, so servers will not download
normal data. Every user should update. If somebody leave it a bit
longer,
then archive mirror will be still useable.
Is there anyone else who agree with me?
I agree. Once regular updates stop being released is it really
necessary for mirrors to carry it in the main archive.
-Imran
--
Imran Hussain
https://sucs.org
10:46 a.m.
El mié, 21-06-2017 a las 16:36 +0100, Imran Hussain escribió:
On 21.06.2017 16:31, Ján ONDREJ wrote:
> Hello,
>
> my myrror (ftp.upjs.sk) has currently only aprox. 100 GB free
> space.
> Is this really needed? Why it's good to hold 630 GB of obsolete
> systems?
> There are no updates for Fedora 22/23, so servers will not download
> normal data. Every user should update. If somebody leave it a bit
> longer,
> then archive mirror will be still useable.
>
> Is there anyone else who agree with me?
I agree. Once regular updates stop being released is it really
necessary for mirrors to carry it in the main archive.
There is a fairly large amount of people who continue to use a release
after it is EOL. It was about making sure that the archives do not get
overloaded with requests as there is not many mirrors there. and to
allow for a smooth transition phase for users. Perhaps we could change
it and keep one less release. I would like to see how many hits we get
on mirrormanager for f22 and f23 today so we can make it an informed
decision.
Dennis
1:04 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:46:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
There is a fairly large amount of people who continue to use a
release
after it is EOL. It was about making sure that the archives do not get
overloaded with requests as there is not many mirrors there. and to
allow for a smooth transition phase for users. Perhaps we could change
it and keep one less release. I would like to see how many hits we get
on mirrormanager for f22 and f23 today so we can make it an informed
decision.
So, the good news on this point is that we're doing a relatively good
job of keeping people current -- the work we're doing on making
upgrades smooth seems to be paying off. A little shy of 47% of mirror
checkins come from F25 (with F26 beta and Rawhide contributing another
1.5%). F24 is 15%, and F23 is 12%.
F22 drops down to 6.2%, F21 is 4.3%, and F20 is 5.9%. (F20 looks like
it's going to linger for a good long time.)
Everthing below F20 is basically peanuts in comparison (although
shout-out to F8, still holding on at around 1.6%, which puts it higher
than every pre-F20 release).
I'm not sure exactly where the cutoff should be, but I guess I'd be a
bit hesitant to move F23 away just yet. But, maybe we should make it
easier for mirrors to have only-current and current-1? (F24 is only
15%, but of course that was much higher six months at F25 launch.)
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
1:47 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 02:04:50PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:46:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> There is a fairly large amount of people who continue to use a release
> after it is EOL. It was about making sure that the archives do not get
> overloaded with requests as there is not many mirrors there. and to
> allow for a smooth transition phase for users. Perhaps we could change
> it and keep one less release. I would like to see how many hits we get
> on mirrormanager for f22 and f23 today so we can make it an informed
> decision.
So, the good news on this point is that we're doing a relatively good
job of keeping people current -- the work we're doing on making
upgrades smooth seems to be paying off. A little shy of 47% of mirror
checkins come from F25 (with F26 beta and Rawhide contributing another
1.5%). F24 is 15%, and F23 is 12%.
F22 drops down to 6.2%, F21 is 4.3%, and F20 is 5.9%. (F20 looks like
it's going to linger for a good long time.)
Everthing below F20 is basically peanuts in comparison (although
shout-out to F8, still holding on at around 1.6%, which puts it higher
than every pre-F20 release).
I'm not sure exactly where the cutoff should be, but I guess I'd be a
bit hesitant to move F23 away just yet. But, maybe we should make it
easier for mirrors to have only-current and current-1? (F24 is only
15%, but of course that was much higher six months at F25 launch.)
I think it would be OK to have 3 releases always on mirrors.
Removal of current-2 would be nice when new release is comming
(week or month before release).
When F22 can be removed from mirrors? It's 300 GB of release,
170 GB of updates and 13 GB of testing updates.
In summary aprox. 0.5 TB.
SAL
2:08 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 02:04:50PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:46:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> There is a fairly large amount of people who continue to use a release
> after it is EOL. It was about making sure that the archives do not get
> overloaded with requests as there is not many mirrors there. and to
> allow for a smooth transition phase for users. Perhaps we could change
> it and keep one less release. I would like to see how many hits we get
> on mirrormanager for f22 and f23 today so we can make it an informed
> decision.
So, the good news on this point is that we're doing a relatively good
job of keeping people current -- the work we're doing on making
upgrades smooth seems to be paying off. A little shy of 47% of mirror
checkins come from F25 (with F26 beta and Rawhide contributing another
1.5%). F24 is 15%, and F23 is 12%.
F22 drops down to 6.2%, F21 is 4.3%, and F20 is 5.9%. (F20 looks like
it's going to linger for a good long time.)
This statistic is a bit different:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager/statistics/2017-06-21/repos...
epel-7 41.1080 % 3803278
epel-6 27.9928 % 2589874
updates-released-f25 6.1853 % 572261
updates-released-f21 6.1011 % 564465
updates-released-f22 5.8795 % 543968
updates-released-f24 2.6841 % 248333
updates-released-f23 1.8801 % 173941
This says that f21 is more popular than f24.
Adrian
3:47 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 09:08:16PM +0200, Adrian Reber wrote:
> upgrades smooth seems to be paying off. A little shy of 47% of
mirror
> checkins come from F25 (with F26 beta and Rawhide contributing another
> 1.5%). F24 is 15%, and F23 is 12%.
>
> F22 drops down to 6.2%, F21 is 4.3%, and F20 is 5.9%. (F20 looks like
> it's going to linger for a good long time.)
This statistic is a bit different:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager/statistics/2017-06-21/repos...
I think that's because it separates out the updates directories from
the base directories; I'm not sure. Smooge can probably clear up the
reason for the discrepancy. I'm also looking at an average of
the last 30 days, while I think that page is just a 24-hour snapshot.
epel-7 41.1080 % 3803278
epel-6 27.9928 % 2589874
updates-released-f25 6.1853 % 572261
updates-released-f21 6.1011 % 564465
updates-released-f22 5.8795 % 543968
updates-released-f24 2.6841 % 248333
updates-released-f23 1.8801 % 173941
This says that f21 is more popular than f24.
Oh, I think I know: my numbers are based on counting one IP only once
per day, but I think the above is raw. So, either there's a big F21
installation behind NAT (very possible) or there's some automated
process hitting F21 harder than newer releases.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
12:58 a.m.
Hello,
here are statistics for ftp.upjs.sk mirror:
By request count:
72060 total
18062 updates_25
14285 updates_24
11872 updates_23
8405 updates_22
4789 releases_23
4739 releases_25
3019 releases_22
2742 development
2260 updates_testing
693 releases_test
618 other
540 releases_24
36 updates_26
By request size:
25466.08 MB updates_25
22129.31 MB updates_24
4014.96 MB releases_25
3693.04 MB updates_22
3527.65 MB development
3503.83 MB updates_23
2561.26 MB updates_testing
2205.86 MB releases_22
1900.48 MB releases_23
1292.58 MB releases_24
572.43 MB releases_test
0.62 MB other
0.11 MB updates_26
In other tere are requests for Fedora 17 - 20 (mostly, but also others),
even if they are not present on my mirror.
Counted from last access.log (this week).
SAL
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 09:08:16PM +0200, Adrian Reber wrote:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 02:04:50PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:46:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > There is a fairly large amount of people who continue to use a release
> > after it is EOL. It was about making sure that the archives do not get
> > overloaded with requests as there is not many mirrors there. and to
> > allow for a smooth transition phase for users. Perhaps we could change
> > it and keep one less release. I would like to see how many hits we get
> > on mirrormanager for f22 and f23 today so we can make it an informed
> > decision.
>
> So, the good news on this point is that we're doing a relatively good
> job of keeping people current -- the work we're doing on making
> upgrades smooth seems to be paying off. A little shy of 47% of mirror
> checkins come from F25 (with F26 beta and Rawhide contributing another
> 1.5%). F24 is 15%, and F23 is 12%.
>
> F22 drops down to 6.2%, F21 is 4.3%, and F20 is 5.9%. (F20 looks like
> it's going to linger for a good long time.)
This statistic is a bit different:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager/statistics/2017-06-21/repos...
epel-7 41.1080 % 3803278
epel-6 27.9928 % 2589874
updates-released-f25 6.1853 % 572261
updates-released-f21 6.1011 % 564465
updates-released-f22 5.8795 % 543968
updates-released-f24 2.6841 % 248333
updates-released-f23 1.8801 % 173941
This says that f21 is more popular than f24.
Adrian
_______________________________________________
Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
3:12 p.m.
On 21 June 2017 at 14:04, Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:46:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> There is a fairly large amount of people who continue to use a release
> after it is EOL. It was about making sure that the archives do not get
> overloaded with requests as there is not many mirrors there. and to
> allow for a smooth transition phase for users. Perhaps we could change
> it and keep one less release. I would like to see how many hits we get
> on mirrormanager for f22 and f23 today so we can make it an informed
> decision.
So, the good news on this point is that we're doing a relatively good
job of keeping people current -- the work we're doing on making
upgrades smooth seems to be paying off. A little shy of 47% of mirror
checkins come from F25 (with F26 beta and Rawhide contributing another
1.5%). F24 is 15%, and F23 is 12%.
F22 drops down to 6.2%, F21 is 4.3%, and F20 is 5.9%. (F20 looks like
it's going to linger for a good long time.)
Everthing below F20 is basically peanuts in comparison (although
shout-out to F8, still holding on at around 1.6%, which puts it higher
than every pre-F20 release).
I'm not sure exactly where the cutoff should be, but I guess I'd be a
bit hesitant to move F23 away just yet. But, maybe we should make it
easier for mirrors to have only-current and current-1? (F24 is only
15%, but of course that was much higher six months at F25 launch.)
Disk space usage:
229579556 ./releases/22
241847672 ./releases/23
266998276 ./releases/24
283076772 ./releases/25
369167536 ./releases/test
149712936 ./updates/22
165263264 ./updates/23
168937164 ./updates/24
152521284 ./updates/25
199292064 ./updates/testing
2226396828 total
[Without hardlinking]
[root@batcave01 linux][PROD]# du -shlc ./releases ./updates
2.1T ./releases
932G ./updates
3.0T total
[With hardlinking]
1.3T ./releases
798G ./updates
2.1T total
In the past we had a '1 TB limit' to what we said we offered on the
mirrors. We are currently at 2-3 times that depending on whether a
mirror can hardlink. I am very worried about how much this will grow
under the new modularity and other images we are planning to present.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
4:02 p.m.
On Wed, 2017-06-21 at 16:12 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 21 June 2017 at 14:04, Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:46:26AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> > There is a fairly large amount of people who continue to use a
> > release
> > after it is EOL. It was about making sure that the archives do
> > not get
> > overloaded with requests as there is not many mirrors there. and
> > to
> > allow for a smooth transition phase for users. Perhaps we could
> > change
> > it and keep one less release. I would like to see how many hits
> > we get
> > on mirrormanager for f22 and f23 today so we can make it an
> > informed
> > decision.
>
> So, the good news on this point is that we're doing a relatively
> good
> job of keeping people current -- the work we're doing on making
> upgrades smooth seems to be paying off. A little shy of 47% of
> mirror
> checkins come from F25 (with F26 beta and Rawhide contributing
> another
> 1.5%). F24 is 15%, and F23 is 12%.
>
> F22 drops down to 6.2%, F21 is 4.3%, and F20 is 5.9%. (F20 looks
> like
> it's going to linger for a good long time.)
>
> Everthing below F20 is basically peanuts in comparison (although
> shout-out to F8, still holding on at around 1.6%, which puts it
> higher
> than every pre-F20 release).
>
> I'm not sure exactly where the cutoff should be, but I guess I'd be
> a
> bit hesitant to move F23 away just yet. But, maybe we should make
> it
> easier for mirrors to have only-current and current-1? (F24 is only
> 15%, but of course that was much higher six months at F25 launch.)
>
Disk space usage:
229579556 ./releases/22
241847672 ./releases/23
266998276 ./releases/24
283076772 ./releases/25
369167536 ./releases/test
149712936 ./updates/22
165263264 ./updates/23
168937164 ./updates/24
152521284 ./updates/25
199292064 ./updates/testing
2226396828 total
[Without hardlinking]
[root@batcave01 linux][PROD]# du -shlc ./releases ./updates
2.1T ./releases
932G ./updates
3.0T total
[With hardlinking]
1.3T ./releases
798G ./updates
2.1T total
In the past we had a '1 TB limit' to what we said we offered on the
mirrors. We are currently at 2-3 times that depending on whether a
mirror can hardlink. I am very worried about how much this will grow
under the new modularity and other images we are planning to present.
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
> Fedora Project Leader
> _______________________________________________
> Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraproj
> ect.org
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
_______________________________________________
Mirror-admin mailing list -- mirror-admin(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to mirror-admin-leave(a)lists.fedoraprojec
t.org
Maybe more scrutiny should be applied to which packages get included in
the Fedora distribution repositories. It looks like about 86 gigabytes
of what we are currently mirroring is games (not accounting for hard
linking).
dnf groupinfo "Games and Entertainment" | awk '/^ / {print $1}' >
~/games.txt
cd /pub/fedora/linux
find . > ~/rpms.txt
for i in $(< ~/games.txt); do for j in $(grep "/$i-" ~/rpms.txt); do du
-B 1K $j >> ~/sizes.txt; done; done
cat ~/sizes.txt | sort | uniq > ~/sizes-uniq.txt
awk '{sum+=$1} END {print sum/1024/1024 "GiB"}' ~/sizes-uniq.txt
86.1718GiB
Alternatively, perhaps the games should have their own classification
parallel with "releases" and "updates" that could be easily filtered.
--
Gregory Lee Bartholomew
PGP Key ID: 3B67510E
8:46 a.m.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 04:02:16PM -0500, Gregory Lee Bartholomew wrote:
On Wed, 2017-06-21 at 16:12 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> mirror can hardlink. I am very worried about how much this will grow
> under the new modularity and other images we are planning to present.
Maybe more scrutiny should be applied to which packages get included in
the Fedora distribution repositories. It looks like about 86 gigabytes
of what we are currently mirroring is games (not accounting for hard
linking).
So, in the short term, Modularity is going to result in an increase in
artifacts, but longer term, I think it's the solution to this problem.
Most of these games -- and particularly their large data sets -- don't
change much from release to release, but yet we rebuild and update them
in duplicate versions.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
3:37 p.m.
>>>> "MM" == Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
MM> I'm not sure exactly where the cutoff should be, but I guess I'd be
MM> a bit hesitant to move F23 away just yet.
The big issue is whether the four or five places which mirror archive handle
the load of the old releases. I don't think it would make much
difference to me, honestly. A secondary consideration is geographical,
since I believe all of those hosts are in the US.
I think all of this is dwarfed by EPEL5 anyway. I'm still getting
between two and five machines per second asking for
/fedora-buffet/archive/epel/5/x86_64/repodata/repomd.xml
MM> But, maybe we should make it easier for mirrors to have only-current
MM> and current-1? (F24 is only 15%, but of course that was much higher
MM> six months at F25 launch.)
Well, if you're using quick-fedora-mirror, it's one line in
quick-fedora-mirror.conf to exclude a release, but you would have to
keep that updated.
FILTEREXP='/(releases/22|updates/22|updates/testing/22)'
I could conceivably come up with a way to generate that somehow so you
could just say how many "old" releases you did want to keep. But it
would be kind of weird, since I don't know exactly how you would define
"old" in this context, and I'm not sure if the client could figure that
out itself or whether we'd need additional information in the file lists
to enable this.
Mirrormanager should be quite fine with this arrangement.
- J<
4:13 p.m.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 03:37:02PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>> "MM" == Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> writes:
MM> I'm not sure exactly where the cutoff should be, but I guess I'd be
MM> a bit hesitant to move F23 away just yet.
The big issue is whether the four or five places which mirror archive handle
the load of the old releases. I don't think it would make much
difference to me, honestly. A secondary consideration is geographical,
since I believe all of those hosts are in the US.
Easy to check:
$ curl
"https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/mirrorlist?repo=fedora-20&arch=x86_64&country=global"
# repo = fedora-20 arch = x86_64 country = global
http://mirrors.rit.edu/fedora/archive/fedora/linux/releases/20/Everything...
http://mirror.math.princeton.edu/pub/fedora-archive/fedora/linux/releases...
https://ftp-stud.hs-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/archive.fedoraproject.org/fe...
https://pubmirror2.math.uh.edu/fedora-buffet/archive/fedora/linux/release...
http://fedora-mirror01.rbc.ru/pub/fedora-archive/fedora/linux/releases/20...
https://fedora-archive.ip-connect.vn.ua/fedora/linux/releases/20/Everythi...
https://pubmirror1.math.uh.edu/fedora-buffet/archive/fedora/linux/release...
http://ftp.cuhk.edu.hk/pub/linux/fedora-archive/fedora/linux/releases/20/...
https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/archive/fedora/linux/releases/20/Everyth...
Adrian
2498
days inactive
2511
days old
mirror-admin@lists.fedoraproject.org
15 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Adrian Reber -
Dennis Gilmore -
Gregory Lee Bartholomew -
Imran Hussain -
Jason L Tibbitts III -
Ján ONDREJ (SAL) -
Matthew Miller -
Mohan Boddu -
Stephen John Smoogen