Developer Only Discussion List

["Jeremy Blosser (emrys)" <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>]

On Oct 20, Eric Sandall [eric AT sandall.us] wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Adam Clark wrote:
> > I have a server available which has the following hardware:
> >
> > - Tyan server board
> > - 2 x 1.2Ghz P3 Tualatin cpu's
> > - 1GB ECC RAM
> >
> > It currently has 2 18GB SCSI drives in it, but space requirements are
> > much more, so was thinking of purchasing 2 200GB (or 160's, depending on
> > what's available today) IDE drives, using one of the SCSI drives as
> > boot/OS and the IDE drives as a software RAID 1'd setup.
> 
> Can this be setup ASAP with our backups restored? We do have some CafePress
> funds if that will help with the purchase of the harddisks (and if other 
> Leads
> agree about using the money for that).

I know Seth talked to Adam and has the backups and is working to get them
up on his line where the current www.sourcemage.org is.  I'm not sure how
this affects the other hardware Adam mentioned.  I think Seth's current
goal is to get things up so we can see where we are while we wait for the
hosted box to get finalized and set up.  I'm hopeful that we can have a box
we control over there sometime tomorrow so we can start on the install/etc.

> > This system could be completely utilized for SMGL purposes, and could be
> > the basis on which other systems are slaved from.  It could be up and
> > running within a few days, too.
> 
> Make it so, please. :)
> 
> > Whether this setup is useful or not, I do strongly agree that whatever
> > path we go down there should be off-site backups (and not just at one
> > location), and if we could do it, have servers that can be set very
> > quickly as master systems in the case that the primary server goes down.
> 
> Unfortunately I didn't keep my off-site backups of the site current
> either. ;/ We should probably look into the SQL server slaving/mirroring
> for other sites so that all we have to do is switch them from slave to
> master when needed.
> <snip>

I think this would make sense if we weren't going with a dedicated hosted
box, but when we are going to have that it seems like the value would be
less.  On a hosted box the worst case scenario is going to be a fried box;
replacing that would be a couple hours (at most) for the hosting center to
get a new box in place, then time for rebuilding the OS and restoring the
data from off-site backups (which will at least exist in my location,
anyone else that wants their own will be welcome to them).  All told it
could take a day or two at most.  I just don't know if it's worth the
effort to keep looking at a distributed system if we expect to have a
resilent enough primary.  Either one would have addressed the current
outage, but I don't know that we need both.

Attachment: pgpP3icT1OYoT.pgp
Description: PGP signature