On Thu, 2012-04-12 at 18:49 -0700, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Peter Pöml <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Am 03.04.2012 um 18:17 schrieb Roberto Galoppini:
> > >> We at SourceForge have worked the last ten days to line-up dedicated
> > >> infrastructure (including CDN services) to support the upcoming AOO
> > >> download serving test.
> > >
> > > I can hardly believe reading this! What's going on? We have an existing
> > (and well working) mirror network, that handles any required load just
> > fine. It's proven and time-tested. It has survived all releases with ease.
> > By all calculation, and by practical experience, the combined upload
> > capacity of the mirrors is sufficient to satisfy the peak download demand
> > as well as the sustained demand. By the way, the "peak download demand"
> > doesn't really differ a lot from the day-to-day download demand, contrary
> > to public belief. The mirrors are numerous and spread around the world, and
> > the chance of a client being sent to a close and fast mirror is good -
> > better than with a handful of mirrors as is the case with the Sourceforge
> > mirror network. Sourceforge specializes in something different - providing
> > a myriad of small files by a set of specialized mirrors. "Normal", plain
> > simple mirrors can't take part in this network as far as I can tell. Even
> > though the network was considerably extended a few years ago, from 10
> > (under 10?) to >20 mirrors, this is still a small number of mirrors. (Even
> > though these are power-mirrors, but those are part of our existing mirror
> > network just as well.)
> > >
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > I don't think anyone is proposing to toss out MirrorBrain.  The
> > most-recent conversations have been about how we can make our download
> > page farm out to all three: Apache, MirrorBrain and SourceForge.  The
> > idea would be that we would have sufficient capacity even with the
> > failure of any one network.
> >
> > Another consideration is this:  We know that the administrative site
> > of the Apache mirror network is reliably staffed.  I believe that
> > SourceForge is reliably staffed.
> 
> 
> Our SiteOp are available 24X7X52, a level of support required to serve over
> 15 million downloads per week, over 2 Pb data per month.
> We actually decided to buy CDNs to provide an additional capacity should it
> be required, and we are using this week to test and collect data to be used
> to optimize the infrastructure to serve the launch peak.
> 
> Advertising revenues actually enables us to subsidize burst capacity
> through those CDNs, not differently from what happened recently with the
> stabilization of both the templates and extensions sites.

Hi Roberto,

I was wondering about that.

When I download an extension, no ads.
Download a template Ads.

How was that decided or rather what is the rational for the different
behavior?

Best wishes,

//drew


> 
> We worked hard also to provide stats and other data feeds that will help
> the Apache Open Office folks see the operating systems, geographic
> locations, and general makeup of their downloaders. You might have a look
> at the documentation we just updated at:
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/p/forge/documentation/Download%20Stats%20API/
> 
> Roberto
> 
> 
> 
> > But what about our MirrorBrain
> > usage?  How many people on the AOO project know all the details about
> > publishing to the network?  If we had to do a release -- say a
> > security patch -- and you were on vacation, do we have the ability to
> > do it?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> 
> ====
> This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. It 
> may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the 
> intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
> distribution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly 
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately 
> notify the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any 
> attachment(s) from your system. Thank you.


Reply via email to