On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 13:48 -0500, Lance Albertson wrote: > Patrick Lauer wrote: > > > (Note to our sponsors: you rock. Keep on rocking.) > > > > Right now bugs is served from a 2,4Ghz P4 - that's roughly a normal > > desktop box from last year. > > You have no concept of where the bottle neck is. I have followed the discussions quite well. I think I'm quite aware of the issues.
> The webserver hosting > the cgi part isn't being loaded hardly at all. Yes, only problem is that bugzilla likes to consume larger amounts of memory, and if I'm not mistaken it's a bad interaction from a OOM killer (to avoid the webfrontend to die) causing stale locks (which should not happen) that causes bugzie to fall over, ja? (I've been told a simple testcase to demonstrate that, haven't tried myself) > The database server is a > pretty beefy box, and again, its not so much a specific hardware > limitation, just more a limitation on the design of bugzilla and its > ties to mysql. We're having to 'fix' the problem by getting a > master/slave mysql db server setup which the OSL didn't have setup at > the time. This is apparently the 'solution' upstream suggests which I > think is daft, but its what we have to do. ... and one of the slowdowns was OSU being unable to get their DB cluster up and running within a reasonable timeframe. Fertilizer happens ... > Please stop stating solutions to problems you don't fully understand or > think you understand. I'm getting tired of all this fud being said > around about stuff people don't totally understand. I'm getting tired of being told "we can manage it", then having to wait 6 months to hear "almost there". We had a few people asking how they could help, and the answer was roughly "we manage fine on our own, thank you very much". Personally I don't mind much, but then you shouldn't complain when people say "we could have done better" ... > Hardware from > sponsors mean nothing if they aren't utilized in a proper manner with > planning and skills. And its not really a big bottle neck of people. That sounds contradictory to me - it's not the people, it's the people? > You > try finding people who have a ton of free time, have excellent admin > skills, gives everyone on the team a 'good vibe' and seems trustworthy. For me it's easy, being a dev for more than, say, 3 months = trustworthy Of course if you need to recruit from the outside the situation changes > Its not as easy as you think it is. Let me try and fail and I'll believe you ... > I'm in the process of bringing on a > guy I know personally which will help the load of things a lot. Plus, he > works with me, so I can kick him literally if he slacks :). (now if only > recruiters *cough*swift*cough* could work faster ;-) ) Cool. > Anyways, I'm not going to rant on about this anymore. We're working on > the problem, and you just have to be patient. Nooooooo :-) You said the bad words again! ;-) I hope you get everything fixed soonish, let's hope Murphy's law doesn't try to apply here ... Patrick -- Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
