I know people complain a lot about the swiki being stable or not, but I hardly *ever* see it down. It certainly doesn't just go down for days at a time, which was claimed earlier. Note, though, that depending on the hardware and software, it's possible to get "connection refused" even if the server is running. In fact, we had a swiki monitor running for a while at Tech, and we got tons of "swiki X is down" messages that were immediately followed by a "swiki X is up again" message. Maybe people are tending to give up after the first try, and never try hitting "reload" even once? -Lex Bert Freudenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jul 2000, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote: > > > Not surprising during a holiday. I'm sure Mark and company will have > > it up soon enough. > > It's still dead. > > > Next step: can we build a redundant slave server that can mirror the > > Swiki and take over the IP address if a heartbeat from the primary > > server fails -- now THAT would be something. Indeed, perhaps we can > > arrange for it to do reasonable load-balancing in the interim? > > There could be a read-only mirror (for example at the european gsug.org > site): Each time a page is modified in the master swiki, a rendered > version of it could be uploaded to a special directory, an email > notification about the changed page would be sent to the mirror, it would > fetch the page. While rendering, the "special links" like edit, upload, > history etc. should point to the master swiki, while all others should be > relative. So if the master goes down, reading would still be possible. > > -- Bert
