Hi, One more suggestion if I may - Whatever the community decides for retention period, it is best to use long term (cheap) archiving for the old recordings, instead of just purging them. Something like AWS Glacier that is $1/TB: https://aws.amazon.com/glacier/
Regards, Ranny. On 11/13/19, 3:48 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Krzysztof Opasiak via Lists.Onap.Org" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Hi, even through I'm not a TSC I'd like to let you know my feedback. On 12.11.2019 17:06, Perala, Timo (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to understand first > > 1) What’s the current cost and what is the savings potential e.g. if we > implement policy along the lines outlined below. > > 2) What’s the volume split between projects/TSC & SubCs/DDFs. > > 3) Assuming the TSC & SubC meeting recordings and DDF recordings > constitute minority, I have inclination to keep them longer (e.g. > indefinitely to start with). > > 4) Project recordings to stay there for the full release. I guess that > would in practice mean 6 moths + small delta. I support Timo's point of view. In general I believe that we should bind the recording lifecycle to ONAP release cadence not the absolute time. Best regards, -- Krzysztof Opasiak Samsung R&D Institute Poland Samsung Electronics -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#5615): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/5615 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/54381323/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
