-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
hmm..I thought (correct me if I wrong) wsus followed a mirror (distributed) model say if a group of servers were pegged the update process would provide remote clients access to the closet and min latency host(s) in order to distribute the load prevent bandwidth saturation.
regards, /virendra
Elijah Savage wrote:
Sean Donelan wrote:
So, maybe an operational question.
What are people seeing as far as network traffic loads due to WMF patching activity, e.g. auto-update and manual downloads? Microsoft has used several CDNs in addition to its own servers to distribute the load in the past. WSUS servers are being pounded right now. Usually 5 to 7% CPU now 72%
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDvqLlpbZvCIJx1bcRAoF4AJ9pi/xlNkX8mSMT4ogZcVccrJ9ijACg854X JhwaWYg6bEmVf4yHVmY6mQI= =3oZt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- You are correct and with BITS2.0 or really any version of BITS which any updated system should have BITS2.0 it will use only the available bandwidth given. So say you are using 70% of your bandwidth, BITS on XP will only use the other 30%. So Bandwidth should not be an issue, but what I have noticed with WSUS is multiple clients connecting to the server will drive cpu utilization up only in peak form though like on initial connection. For us this is one service that was not built redundant because if for some reason like maintenance and our server is down the clients will then failover to Micro$ofts servers to get them
Vicky Røde wrote: directly. -- http://www.digitalrage.org/ The Information Technology News Center