Joe added a comment.
wdqs1001 installed just fine (after I figured out I needed at least one deploy
for trebuchet to work).
Installing wdqs1002 now, then I'll set up the LVS config.
TASK DETAIL
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86561
EMAIL PREFERENCES
Joe added a comment.
Both servers are up and running and the wdqs-blazegraph service is running and
the banner page shows on port 80.
I will finish this work (adding LVS and eventually varnish support).
Stas and James can now log into the machine and play with it - it's still not
exposed to
Joe added a comment.
I am currently installing wdqs1001; upon validation of the install, I'll add
wdqs1002 as well.
TASK DETAIL
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86561
EMAIL PREFERENCES
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
To: Joe
Cc: gerritbot, RobH,
gerritbot added a comment.
Change 225848 merged by Giuseppe Lavagetto:
wdqs: install as jessie, add partman recipe
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/225848
TASK DETAIL
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86561
EMAIL PREFERENCES
Joe added a comment.
Imaging wmf3543 as wdqs1001
TASK DETAIL
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86561
EMAIL PREFERENCES
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
To: Joe
Cc: RobH, Matanya, faidon, mark, JanZerebecki, Aklapper, Joe, Smalyshev,
Manybubbles, jkroll,
gerritbot added a subscriber: gerritbot.
gerritbot added a comment.
Change 225848 had a related patch set uploaded (by Giuseppe Lavagetto):
wdqs: install as jessie, add partman recipe
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/225848
TASK DETAIL
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86561
EMAIL
Joe added a comment.
Yes, I was waiting for this evening's WQS meeting before reassessing
priority/status, but marking it stalled is fair.
TASK DETAIL
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86561
REPLY HANDLER ACTIONS
Reply to comment or attach files, or !close, !claim, !unsubscribe or
mark added a subscriber: mark.
mark added a comment.
Different rows for availability is one thing. We need to think about how to
distribute the service to two different data centers as well, and should build
this out in both from the start. Latency certainly //is// a significant factor
there.
GWicke added a comment.
In https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86561#971491, @JanZerebecki wrote:
Do we want to have the Cassandra and Titan nodes be in the same rack as I
assume that query performance is very latency sensitive?
I don't think that there is a huge enough difference in latency
