[Udpcast] Re: Udpcast Alternative Boot Disks

Andrew Cooks acooks at cs.up.ac.za
Thu Mar 13 16:56:27 CET 2003

I'm not too sure what you're saying, but if you're asking about saving an 
image on a server in compressed form instead of uncompressed, I think it 
works as follows:

If you don't use compression, the size of the file will be the same as the 
size of the partition or disk it is an image of. This could be what you 
want if you have lots of space on a slow machine, or a super fast network. 

Compression might be cool if you have a slow network, or super fast
machines on a 10/100Mb network, or just a lack of storage space.

IMHO, storing images on a server is not such a good thing. People should 
patch the software installations before casting a new image and to do that 
the image needs to be running on a machine. When this machine (image) is 
ready for deployment, then you could just as well cast that drive 
sector-by-sector. I do admit that it is easier to start from the previous 
image than to reinstall a machine, but using an older image promotes 
laziness of installing patches and bug-fixes.


> when your are compressing the image, are you makeing a smaller imafe file.  i
> use udp cast to store my images and a server.  if i used no compression, what
> would the file size be?  i have yet to try it.  i always just compressed.
> (John Allison †)

Andrew Cooks
TechTeam                 	TechTeam -- "We make it work."
Computer Science dept.
University of Pretoria

"I don't make jokes in base 13. Anyone who does should get help."
 -Douglas Adams

More information about the Udpcast mailing list