Re: postgresql?
> > > It's administration of multiple daemons for one architecture that is
> > > the real issue. I'm still trying to come up with a good solution for
> > > this - it's about half written, I think...
> >
> > We're currently running six machines for m68k. One has the database
> > locally, the others use ssh for wanna-build. I fail to see the problem
> > here (other than getting enough people to process the logs, of course).
>
> Sorry, the paragraph I wrote above says the exact opposite. That's not
> what I meant at all. PowerPC is not short CPU cycles; voltaire's daily
> build rarely takes more than a few hours. It's log processing, and my
> little brain, that are bottlenecks.
Well, that aspect of administration wasn't what I thought you were talking
about, obviously. I didn't forget you said that before, and I wasn't
suggesting something along 'just set up a bunch of buildds, Dan is going
to take care of the rest'.
I'm well aware of the bottleneck. The PowerPC port is quite active so it
should be not hard to find a volunteer developer for each buildd machine
to handle the logs. Michel Daenzer offered to help, and so did I. We need
some way to access the wanna-build database (write access, or course) for
that to work. We can use either special buildd2, buildd3 ... accounts for
that, or regular user accounts. Your choice.
> > would be a creative interpretation of export regulations :-). I don't
> > think the fact that the database resides on a US machine conflicts with US
> > law, right?
>
> I'm not sure. I suppose you're right.
I sure hope so. What sense would it make to move the database to
ftp-master, then?
Michael
Reply to: