net-op: traffic loads as the result of patching

Sat Jan 7 04:02:56 UTC 2006

Vicky Røde wrote:
> -----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 
directly.

-- 
http://www.digitalrage.org/
The Information Technology News Center