| 1 |
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 13:20 +0000, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
> > No, not really. Just that I'd expect kinda more proactive approach than |
| 3 |
> > the one demonstrated fex. in |
| 4 |
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128588#c29 (and a bit more |
| 5 |
> > flexible approach to other alternatives, such as HW/hosting offers we've |
| 6 |
> > received before) and that have been declined for various strange reasons. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Linking to a bug where you make crazed comments about how bugs isn't |
| 9 |
> fixed!!!!1111oneone and that dammit someone should do something |
| 10 |
> now!!!1111 doesn't really help your case. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I bet if I was infra I'd be wondering what my options were since: |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> bugs is a pretty critical part of developing; AND |
| 15 |
yes |
| 16 |
> you can't just host it anywhere; AND |
| 17 |
it's not _that_ much hardware (and bandwidth) needed |
| 18 |
> the hardware needed for it to perform is expensive; AND |
| 19 |
for a single person yes. For a sponsor (or a group of sponsors) it may |
| 20 |
be ok |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> they did not know what the problem was at first |
| 23 |
And even there it took some heavy prodding to get people to look at the problem. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
After about half a year of waiting, with people we would consider |
| 26 |
reliable offering pretty much everything from hosting to hardware, it's |
| 27 |
hard to listen to the "be patient" mantra without thinking "omgwtfbbq, |
| 28 |
it is _still_ not fixed?". Especially since bugs is considered an |
| 29 |
important part of our infrastructure. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> As in, you don't just grab the first dual proc system that was offered |
| 32 |
> out of some guys basement to host bugs on. |
| 33 |
Agreed, but I'd say a webhoster with >1000 machines should know what |
| 34 |
they are doing. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> You need a dedicated host |
| 37 |
> who will stick around and provide good support should something go |
| 38 |
> wrong. |
| 39 |
Only experience can tell you how they will respond, and even reliable |
| 40 |
sponsors could get axed if their managment changes. We have almost no |
| 41 |
hardware in Europe, that's a huge untapped ressource ... |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
> You need expensive hardware ( I believe we got a blade server |
| 44 |
> with 3 blades in it, which is fscking expensive if you haven't priced |
| 45 |
> one out before ). So once again, chill out. They are working on it. |
| 46 |
Dude, you don't need blades for it. Any "normal" server will do, two for DB and one for web frontend. |
| 47 |
That we got blades is really nice and sweet, but if you check the |
| 48 |
traffic and throughput of bugzilla (and then double or triple that for |
| 49 |
future growth) you should still be able to do it easily. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
(Note to our sponsors: you rock. Keep on rocking.) |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Right now bugs is served from a 2,4Ghz P4 - that's roughly a normal |
| 54 |
desktop box from last year. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
> And yes bugs is slow and yes it sucks, but bitching about it doesn't |
| 57 |
> accomplish anything :x |
| 58 |
It may cause discussion that may lead to accelerated problem solving :-) |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
hth, |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Patrick |
| 63 |
-- |
| 64 |
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move |
Archives