[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Too few up-to-date CD image mirrors

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, jason andrade wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > Yeah, but we don't _have_ that 120 GB drive. That's a bit of a showstopper,
> > don't you think? :)
> if need be i'll try and organize one to be sent.

The current needs for that machine is:

3x120+GB drives (pref. identical to the one already bought, 180GXP 120GB)
Intel PRO/1000 XT Server (the "server" part is important, 64-bit pci)
3x512MB REG ECC DDR (or [2-3]x1GB if the sponsor is feeling very generous)

We have the bare bones to get it up and running right now, but not with
the space for cdimages (only one 120 gig drive and the primary function
is to hold a debian mirror).

That machine is this, for those curious:

With two 120-gig disks we could start this without any redundancy or room
to grow. With two more we'd have both redundancy and some extra space for
the images. And I do want this redundancy, not because it is hard to
restore the images from backup/other hosts, but to make recovery from a
disk failure faster.

> > It should simply say "sync whatever way is fastest for you, once per point
> > release, leave it be in the meantime". I don't see what the fuss is about :)
> i agree with the sentiment - essentially that is exactly what all the
> active mirror admins (ones with no life?) seem to be doing, e.g mattias,
> myself and a few others.

Yes, but with better documentation, it is probably easier for other admins
to pick up on this.

> but it is probably still a good thing to spell it out a bit more, even
> if only so that new admins understand how it works.
> e.g
> cdimage.debian.org is the authoritative repository for master official ISO and
> DVD images for the debian project.


Sounds good.

/Mattias Wadenstein

Reply to: