Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability

From: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,PostgreSQL www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability
Date: 2004-09-29 19:07:20
Message-ID: 20040929155958.U93533@ganymede.hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-www
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:

> I agree that when we have more servers dedicated to PostgreSQL, we 
> should use a different approach than the jails.  Marc, what are the 
> advantages of the jails on a dedicated server, since we are so familiar 
> with their drawbacks?

'k, just to re-emphasize ... the jails are not, and have never been, the 
problem ... when I can put a dedicated server in, though, the thing that 
will fix the problem is getting rid of the unionfs that we're using to 
converse disk space ...

as to what advantages the jail's provide ... mainly, security ... we can 
easily provide root access to pugs.postgresql.org, as an example, so that 
Fred (please tell me I remembered right?) can do whatever work he wants, 
without giving him full root on the developer jail ... same with all of 
the other jails ... Chris has full root on gborg, so that he doesn't have 
to ask someone else to do something when he notices a problem (ie. restart 
mailman) ...

The other advantage ... seperate process space ... so, as an example, if 
someone wanted to run a different server then apache on port 80, they 
could ...

> But being solved.  The archives have been copied to CommandPrompt, and 
> the various archive search tools have been distributed.  Once we can 
> change the web interface, there should always be one tool and/or version 
> available regardless of individual server/hosting failures.

Joshua and I should have this switched over by end of day today ... I just 
did a bunch of "clean ups" to fix some of the issues with the search form, 
but to also balance things out a bit more ... also removed the right 
banner ad, so that page loading is a bit faster ... and I think we have 
the 'Last-modified' stuff finally working properly ...

> The big obstacle in moving anything is bandwidth.   While any number of
> companies will offer to host stuff for us, we can't match the amount of
> bandwidth we're currently using in Panama -- and hosting donors won't support
> anywhere near that level (which runs to scores of GB per month).  So while we
> can move individual, less-crucial components

And this is somethign that we have been working on over the past several 
months ... search has moved to John's location/servers, archives has done 
one move so far, and is going to be moving to CPs location, etc ...

And, now that we have, at least, an option for the hot failover, those VMs 
that it is safe to do it with, we can get that going so that downtime of 
one server isn't near as critical as it once was ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

In response to

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Darcy BuskermolenDate: 2004-09-29 19:08:48
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-09-29 19:05:59
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Darcy BuskermolenDate: 2004-09-29 19:08:48
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-09-29 19:05:59
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Server unreliability

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group