Re: Any use for a new server?
- From: Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org>
- To: Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>
- Cc: gnome-sysadmin gnome org, gnome-infrastructure gnome org
- Subject: Re: Any use for a new server?
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:12:20 +0100
On Wed, Dec 12, 2007 at 05:41:30PM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> [sorry for sysadmins, sending the mail here since it's better to take it
> here and the info is public -- my bad for not seeing this earlier]
Seen this just in time..
> Google might give us one or two boxes to thank us for our participation
> to GHOP. The brief description of the boxes is: Gigabyte 1U boxes, dual
> P3 1.2Ghz w/2G RAM, 1x250G IDE HD (but +2 hotswap slots, and possibility
> to have more drives), CD drive.
> Do we have some use for such boxes? I've already asked the people
> working on online desktop if they'd be interested in having one, but if
> there's something with higher priority, then, well, it has higher
> priority :-)
For real server purposes we'd need to add RAID1 (another HDD), but that
is not really a problem (IDE is cheap).
1.2GHz? seems slow (even as dual). Not sure if that would match with our
We can use it for two purposes (perhaps other things as well):
- For the new www.gnome.org. It uses Plone and it seems to require a
lot of server capacity (meaning, 3 servers is preferred). It would
otherwise go on window, the machine that does most websites, anoncvs
(still) and ftp.gnome.org (installing modules, rsync).
- As build slaves for build.gnome.org. Currently those extra build
slaves are waiting upon a rewrite of buildbot (to use one port). If
these machines would be sitting at Red Hat, then there wouldn't be a
So yes, servers are welcome. However, I think we should have faster
ones (meaning, they are of course welcome if Red Hat agrees, but above
list are CPU bound). Could ask online desktop it these servers fit
better with their needs.
] [Thread Prev