On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 23:28:36 +0100 Andreas wrote: > I would suggest we start maintaining > this information in the wiki as well
there are dedicated wiki pages for the servers, with each server having its own sub-article - they have not been updated though, since everything from proton was moved to winston https://wiki.parabola.nu/Hacking:Servers i have added a revised list of services to the wiki for the purpose of this discussion, so that it can be further revised https://wiki.parabola.nu/Hacking:Servers/In-Progress-2019-11 on that list, i sorted the services primarily as essential/non-essential to suggest that all essential services remain on winston, with backup instances on another box ready for emergency use - all those labeled as "essential" have been on on winston all along, while the web and non-essentials were split between proton and winston - the web and non-essential services are the ones we should consider partitioning across other boxes - the web services especially are the ones most likely to go crazy with resource usage, and the most likely to be hassled by bots lukeshu explained to me that the separation between proton and winston was such that all clients of mysql were on one box and all clients of pg were on the other - when we migrated everything to winston, lukeshu was leery that mixing these could cause performance problems i do hope that lukeshu chimes in on this discussion - more than anyone, he has been the main architect of the parabola infrastructure, and is still the one who is most familiar with it's subtleties and quirks On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 23:28:36 +0100 Andreas wrote: > which part of our infrastructure could and / or should be > converted to packages, instead of unaccounted for files. AFAIK there is very little running on winston that is not published publicly already - most of the web services are not packages because they were forked from arch or the upstream as git repos; and our patches are in that form - i think mailman and cgit are the only web services that are managed by pacman - most internal services are pacman packages, and most of the custom tools are packaged from code in the git repos On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 23:28:36 +0100 Andreas wrote: > like to take a gander at automatic provisioners, such as > ansible, a while back lukeshu put some things under the holo configuration management system - that probably the part of the system that i know the least about; but it presumably does a similar job as ansible - also, etckeeper is managing arbitrary configuration files; and the git repo manages it's own metadata via git hooks in a similar way as etckeeper does _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
