New Server?

[hatky]

Since the Slash Dot pice on Wine the server is dead
half the day....
Why not get the site on a new server
I know what you are going to say:
"Have you got one?"
:)
How about wine.sf.net?

You already have a project open on source forge is it
that difficult to move the site to their server?
I THINK they can handle the load

I assume there is some reason it has not been done but
if there is not any meager issue I think it will be
done at least for now (till the users stop coming :) )

What do you think?

Hatky.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com

[Jeremy White]

Actually, the old server had enough moxy to handle the load;
it had been through several Slashdottings.  We've got
both the hardware resources and the bandwidth to handle
this just fine.

We just relied on our good luck holding more than we should
have...

It turns out that one of the SCSI drives was slowly
and steadily flaking out, causing all kinds of fun
problems.  And we didn't have the hardware raid
turned on...

So Jer and I had a really fun night last night.
The highlight of which was squeezing the SCSI
drive electronics for 1-2 hours while the data
copied off.

The good news is that the server is now up on a completely
new box with a brand new shiny drive.  The bad news
is that it's still not set up on the proper hardware
raid we mean for it to have.  That's next weeks project...

We're pretty sure that we copied everything properly,
but the drive was really quite flaky towards the end,
and we have found numerous cases of corrupted files.
We're going to go through and test them on a point
by point basis, and restore from tape where necessary,
but please keep an eye out and let us know if you
find issues.

But the server should be solid for the next few days;
except for a brief period next week, when we'll take it down
and put in a proper hardware raid...<grin>.

Cheers,

Jeremy

hatky wrote:
> Since the Slash Dot pice on Wine the server is dead
> half the day....
> Why not get the site on a new server
> I know what you are going to say:
> "Have you got one?"
> :)
> How about wine.sf.net?
>
> You already have a project open on source forge is it
> that difficult to move the site to their server?
> I THINK they can handle the load
>
> I assume there is some reason it has not been done but
> if there is not any meager issue I think it will be
> done at least for now (till the users stop coming :) )
>
> What do you think?
>
> Hatky.
>
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> http://search.yahoo.com

[Mike Hearn]

On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 14:28, Jeremy White wrote:
> Actually, the old server had enough moxy to handle the load;
> it had been through several Slashdottings.  We've got
> both the hardware resources and the bandwidth to handle
> this just fine.

Just out of curiousity, what are the specs of the WineHQ box, and how
much bandwidth do you guys have?

I'm currently trying to convince IE5.0 to not suck, hence my frustration
and boredom.... need something to gawp at before I go to sleep...

[Jeremy White]

Well,

I'll let Jer tell you about the box he speced out that
we authorized him to buy.  It was very nice...

Yesterday I went to a local dealer and said:
I need a server, and I have to walk out of here with
it in 1 hour.  So what I got was the best of what they
had.

Which was a dual Athlon MP/2000 system, with 
a 36Gig SCSI drive (they didn't have the 
hardware raid card, so it's not raided yet), and 2 Gig
of RAM.

Truthfully, our old box (dual Intel 800's) was 
plenty fast; it's never really had much trouble keeping up.
Linux is a remarkably efficient server OS <grin>.

We're going to add a nice Adaptec hardware raid card
and raid up the drives.

We're fortunate in that we colocate with our ISP
that has multiple OC-3s, and they mostly use the
downstream bandwidth...

The eventual plan is to replicate this box at another
colo and then have two boxes, DNS round robined,
and mirrored.

Jer also wants to put in dedicated mysql servers,
but truthfully, we're still figuring out what
the best practice is.  Anyone want to send us advice
(privately would be best; this isn't a sysadmin list),
we'll cheerfully listen.  I think we have enough
egg on our face that we'll humbly accept advice :-/

Cheers,

Jer

On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 08:50, Mike Hearn wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 14:28, Jeremy White wrote:
> > Actually, the old server had enough moxy to handle the load;
> > it had been through several Slashdottings.  We've got
> > both the hardware resources and the bandwidth to handle
> > this just fine.
>
> Just out of curiousity, what are the specs of the WineHQ box, and how
> much bandwidth do you guys have?
>
> I'm currently trying to convince IE5.0 to not suck, hence my frustration
> and boredom.... need something to gawp at before I go to sleep...
>
> -- 
> Mike Hearn 
> QinetiQ - Malvern Technology Center