Обсуждение: Re: [Gforge-admins] PgFoundry Move
> > My concerns with a plan like this are: > > A) I do not know linux as well as FreeBSD. > > 80% of the Gforge admins are Linux guys afaik, which is why > we need more FreeBSD help. You're probably going to see that split for anything where you compare linux with freebsd today, aren't you? Or at least on average. > > B) Can infrastructure be provided to allow for timely disaster > > recovery in the event of JD's hosting falling off the face of the > > earth, (much the same way the pg servers in panama fell off a while > > ago). > > We don't have this *really* in the case of most of the > infrastructure, and this isn't in place for pgFoundry right > now with Marc hosting, afaik. It is an issue we should be > concerned with regardless of who's hosting. That and backup. > I've tried to address what's happening (or not happening as > I'm afraid) with backup before. Yes, backup is definitly more important than failover. But failover is nice :-) But in reality, do we have it? As in failover that works in practice as well. Just look at what happened when there was an attempt to move svr2 (wwwmaster) off unionfs to a new VM *on the same machine*. It's very good in principle. I'm sure in a lot of cases it works in practice as well. I'm concerned it doesn't always, and that we are very relying on certain people to make it work in that case. > > C) How do we settle on the distro/version of the month, this > > fundamental issue within Linux has always left me with a > bad taste in > > my mouth. (this is a personal item and has nothing to say for the > > quality of FreeBSD or Linux/distro). > > Unlike *BSD? Generally there have been distros like Debian > and Slackware that have been server grade for over 10 years > and are solid. I think the distro of the month is a > unwarranted slam from FreeBSD people who don't see that > others see BSD the same way (Free, Net, Open, etc) just with > less choice for their respective communities. There are lots > of Linux distros. Some are better at the desktop, some are > better at the server. Coming up with a consensus of what to > use would be pretty easy to do. That being said, I don't I'd say trivial. Just poll the ppl who'd be expected to admin it for preferences, and decide on one. Then stick with it as much as you can :-) There is absolutely no need to do a general poll of the whol community, since that's definitly going to give you more than you want :-) > foresee a day that we'd use Linux just because everything > else is running on FreeBSD. Being consistent is a good thing. Everything else does not run FreeBSD. All www.postgresql.org servers except borg (there are 5 in total, IIRC) run Linux today. AFAIK, archives and search also run on linux. (And on a mix of distros, which is probably not ideal) //Magnus
Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> My concerns with a plan like this are: >>> A) I do not know linux as well as FreeBSD. >> 80% of the Gforge admins are Linux guys afaik, which is why >> we need more FreeBSD help. > > You're probably going to see that split for anything where you compare > linux with freebsd today, aren't you? Or at least on average. Well yes which is my point. I am not knocking FreeBSD (well it's software RAID setup is a PITA but other then that). I am looking at this from a purely... let's talk about resources issue and our resources are in Linux except for a small handful of people. FYI, I can and do use FreeBSD. I prefer Linux. > > Yes, backup is definitly more important than failover. But failover is > nice :-) > But in reality, do we have it? As in failover that works in practice as > well. Just look at what happened when there was an attempt to move svr2 > (wwwmaster) off unionfs to a new VM *on the same machine*. > It's very good in principle. I'm sure in a lot of cases it works in > practice as well. I'm concerned it doesn't always, and that we are very > relying on certain people to make it work in that case. If the system is correctly documented and occasionally tested we should be able to do this. > preferences, and decide on one. Then stick with it as much as you can > :-) There is absolutely no need to do a general poll of the whol > community, since that's definitly going to give you more than you want > :-) HAHA... I can see it now: Vote for which Linux Pgfoundry will run on... The really bad thing about this is Gentoo would probably win ;) > > Everything else does not run FreeBSD. All www.postgresql.org servers > except borg (there are 5 in total, IIRC) run Linux today. AFAIK, > archives and search also run on linux. (And on a mix of distros, which > is probably not ideal) Yes Archives and buildfarm both run on Linux. I don't know about the others. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > > //Magnus -- The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: PLphp, PLperl - http://www.commandprompt.com/
On Jan 16, 2006, at 2:25 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> 80% of the Gforge admins are Linux guys afaik, which is why >> we need more FreeBSD help. > > You're probably going to see that split for anything where you compare > linux with freebsd today, aren't you? Or at least on average. I agree with that. > Yes, backup is definitly more important than failover. But failover is > nice :-) > But in reality, do we have it? As in failover that works in > practice as > well. Just look at what happened when there was an attempt to move > svr2 > (wwwmaster) off unionfs to a new VM *on the same machine*. > It's very good in principle. I'm sure in a lot of cases it works in > practice as well. I'm concerned it doesn't always, and that we are > very > relying on certain people to make it work in that case. Failover is nice, but I don't agree that VM's are the best wait to handle fail over. > I'd say trivial. Just poll the ppl who'd be expected to admin it for > preferences, and decide on one. Then stick with it as much as you can > :-) There is absolutely no need to do a general poll of the whol > community, since that's definitly going to give you more than you want > :-) Yeah I just meant on GForge Admins or the current list of community server admins. > Everything else does not run FreeBSD. All www.postgresql.org servers > except borg (there are 5 in total, IIRC) run Linux today. AFAIK, > archives and search also run on linux. (And on a mix of distros, which > is probably not ideal) Except borg? wow. And here I am a linux guy donating the only FBSD box. ;-) Gavin
On Jan 16, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > FYI, I can and do use FreeBSD. I prefer Linux. Same here > If the system is correctly documented and occasionally tested > we should be able to do this. What I'd like to see is a master svn repository for gforge code that we use. that plus database backups would make for easy restore or failover if we have issues. To not use source control on our changes to the gforge code seems a bit silly. Of course this should be isolated on a different machine than the gforge machine. > >> preferences, and decide on one. Then stick with it as much as you can >> :-) There is absolutely no need to do a general poll of the whol >> community, since that's definitly going to give you more than you >> want >> :-) > HAHA... I can see it now: > > Vote for which Linux Pgfoundry will run on... > > The really bad thing about this is Gentoo would probably win ;) Hey now, don't knock Gentoo. I was a slackware user since 1994 and switched to Gentoo a few years back. I love it. It's not like it's lfs and portage is pretty damn powerful. ;-) Don't let those funroll-loops guys fool you, it can be serious on the server side too. Gavin M. Roy 800 Pound Gorilla gmr@ehpg.net
> >> If the system is correctly documented and occasionally tested >> we should be able to do this. > > What I'd like to see is a master svn repository for gforge code that > we use. that plus database backups would make for easy restore or > failover if we have issues. To not use source control on our changes > to the gforge code seems a bit silly. Of course this should be > isolated on a different machine than the gforge machine. Well I am 100% for that! I can set up a trac and everything! > Hey now, don't knock Gentoo. I was a slackware user since 1994 and > switched to Gentoo a few years back. I love it. It's not like it's > lfs and portage is pretty damn powerful. ;-) Don't let those > funroll-loops guys fool you, it can be serious on the server side too. I have you beat... I started with SLS (what Slackware was based off of) and in general I don't have a problem with Gentoo but I would not use it in a production server environment. I love using it for development. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > Gavin M. Roy > 800 Pound Gorilla > gmr@ehpg.net > -- The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: PLphp, PLperl - http://www.commandprompt.com/
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> foresee a day that we'd use Linux just because everything >> else is running on FreeBSD. Being consistent is a good thing. > > Everything else does not run FreeBSD. All www.postgresql.org servers > except borg (there are 5 in total, IIRC) run Linux today. AFAIK, > archives and search also run on linux. (And on a mix of distros, which > is probably not ideal) www.postgresql.org servers other then borg are mirrors, and not critical. archives is a mirror, with the original being run on FreeBSD ... and search can be recreated on the fly as required ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Gavin M. Roy wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> FYI, I can and do use FreeBSD. I prefer Linux. > > Same here > >> If the system is correctly documented and occasionally tested >> we should be able to do this. > > What I'd like to see is a master svn repository for gforge code that we use. > that plus database backups would make for easy restore or failover if we have > issues. To not use source control on our changes to the gforge code seems a > bit silly. Of course this should be isolated on a different machine than the > gforge machine. 'k, so what has stop'd you from setting it up? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >>> foresee a day that we'd use Linux just because everything >>> else is running on FreeBSD. Being consistent is a good thing. >> >> Everything else does not run FreeBSD. All www.postgresql.org servers >> except borg (there are 5 in total, IIRC) run Linux today. AFAIK, >> archives and search also run on linux. (And on a mix of distros, >> which is probably not ideal) > > www.postgresql.org servers other then borg are mirrors, and not > critical. archives is a mirror, with the original being run on FreeBSD > ... and search can be recreated on the fly as required ... They are not critical? Do you hear yourself man? search is about to be a Linux machine. Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: PLphp, PLperl - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Too many cooks, not wanting to step on toes, not knowing if we had a place to store the master repository, not bringing it up because I've been too busy with work and other projects and us not having general sys admin discussions about pgFoundry. Gavin On Jan 16, 2006, at 3:04 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Gavin M. Roy wrote: > >> >> On Jan 16, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> >>> FYI, I can and do use FreeBSD. I prefer Linux. >> >> Same here >> >>> If the system is correctly documented and occasionally tested >>> we should be able to do this. >> >> What I'd like to see is a master svn repository for gforge code >> that we use. that plus database backups would make for easy >> restore or failover if we have issues. To not use source control >> on our changes to the gforge code seems a bit silly. Of course >> this should be isolated on a different machine than the gforge >> machine. > > 'k, so what has stop'd you from setting it up? > > ---- > Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http:// > www.hub.org) > Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: > 7615664 Gavin M. Roy 800 Pound Gorilla gmr@ehpg.net
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Gavin M. Roy wrote: > Too many cooks I thought lack of that was why things weren't getting done ... > not wanting to step on toes Step on some toes, we've had a server in place for this for almost a year now, having a few toes step'd on might have gotten this moving forward faster ... > not knowing if we had a place to store the master repository Put it onto the main vServer for now, moving it should be a matter of rsync'ng it to a different server after, no? > bringing it up because I've been too busy with work and other projects That's always a big one ... > us not having general sys admin discussions about pgFoundry. We have a list for it, so no reason why those discussions haven't happened ... > > Gavin > > On Jan 16, 2006, at 3:04 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Gavin M. Roy wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 16, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> >>>> FYI, I can and do use FreeBSD. I prefer Linux. >>> >>> Same here >>> >>>> If the system is correctly documented and occasionally tested >>>> we should be able to do this. >>> >>> What I'd like to see is a master svn repository for gforge code that we >>> use. that plus database backups would make for easy restore or failover if >>> we have issues. To not use source control on our changes to the gforge >>> code seems a bit silly. Of course this should be isolated on a different >>> machine than the gforge machine. >> >> 'k, so what has stop'd you from setting it up? >> >> ---- >> Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) >> Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664 > > Gavin M. Roy > 800 Pound Gorilla > gmr@ehpg.net > > ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> >>>> foresee a day that we'd use Linux just because everything >>>> else is running on FreeBSD. Being consistent is a good thing. >>> >>> Everything else does not run FreeBSD. All www.postgresql.org servers >>> except borg (there are 5 in total, IIRC) run Linux today. AFAIK, archives >>> and search also run on linux. (And on a mix of distros, which is probably >>> not ideal) >> >> www.postgresql.org servers other then borg are mirrors, and not critical. >> archives is a mirror, with the original being run on FreeBSD ... and search >> can be recreated on the fly as required ... > They are not critical? Do you hear yourself man? > > search is about to be a Linux machine. Yup, and if we had to, it could be setup on a different machine just as easily ... it rely's on the other servers, it isn't a stand alone ... wwwmaster is a standalone, postgresql.org is a stand alone, pgfoundry is a stand alone, as is gborg ... everything else *feeds* off of them, including search ... Sorry, didn't mean critical as not-important, I meant critical as in easily reproduced from scratch if we had to ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Monday 16 January 2006 14:33, Gavin M. Roy wrote: > On Jan 16, 2006, at 2:25 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> 80% of the Gforge admins are Linux guys afaik, which is why > >> we need more FreeBSD help. > > > > You're probably going to see that split for anything where you compare > > linux with freebsd today, aren't you? Or at least on average. > > I agree with that. > > > Yes, backup is definitly more important than failover. But failover is > > nice :-) > > But in reality, do we have it? As in failover that works in > > practice as > > well. Just look at what happened when there was an attempt to move > > svr2 > > (wwwmaster) off unionfs to a new VM *on the same machine*. > > It's very good in principle. I'm sure in a lot of cases it works in > > practice as well. I'm concerned it doesn't always, and that we are > > very > > relying on certain people to make it work in that case. > > Failover is nice, but I don't agree that VM's are the best wait to > handle fail over. > > > I'd say trivial. Just poll the ppl who'd be expected to admin it for > > preferences, and decide on one. Then stick with it as much as you can > > > > :-) There is absolutely no need to do a general poll of the whol > > > > community, since that's definitly going to give you more than you want > > > > :-) > > Yeah I just meant on GForge Admins or the current list of community > server admins. > > > Everything else does not run FreeBSD. All www.postgresql.org servers > > except borg (there are 5 in total, IIRC) run Linux today. AFAIK, > > archives and search also run on linux. (And on a mix of distros, which > > is probably not ideal) > > Except borg? wow. And here I am a linux guy donating the only FBSD > box. ;-) if it makes you feel better ca3 is a FreeBSD box :-) Which reminds me there is something bogus with the checker for mirror freshness, because it says I'm behind by a "long" interval yet I picked up all the point releases before the announcement hit the lists... > > Gavin -- Darcy Buskermolen Wavefire Technologies Corp. http://www.wavefire.com ph: 250.717.0200 fx: 250.763.1759