sajolida: > anonym: >> sajolida: >>> During the 2.12 release at least one of our mirrors run out of >>> disk space. They followed our instructions closely and allocated 10 >>> GiB (we ask for "5-10 GiB") and apparently we're now a bit above 10 >>> GiB. >> >> Ouch! :/ >> >>> I'd like to: >>> >>> 1. Make sure that we have a process set up to clean very old IUKs. >>> >>> For example, we could say that we only keep IUKs for the big >>> version number. IUKs for 2.x until 3.0 is out as a change in the >>> big version number will lead to no IUK for everybody. Right I see >>> IUKs for 1.0~test on the mirrors which lead me to believe that >>> there is only an ad-hoc process: >> >> The 1.0~test IUK is a dummy IUK used for automated testing. Please >> ignore it! :) > > Ah! > >>> http://dl.amnesia.boum.org/tails/stable/iuk/ >>> >>> I didn't check what the release process says about that. >> >> At the moment the process is to always remove IUKs that are older >> than six months, and to remove ~alpha/~beta/~rc IUKs as soon as the >> final release is out (except the IUKs upgrading from those versions >> to the final one, of course). > > With this and the 1.0~test thingie, I understand better what I see on > the mirrors and I'm happy that we already have a good process :) > >>> 2. Fix the current requirements which seems too low. Let's do a bit >>> of calculation. Now is a quite epic time for mirrors with 12 >>> versions in the 2.x cycle and a heavy preparation for 3.0 so it a >>> good time to adjust our requirements. >>> >>> - We're now publishing two IUKs per version (n-2→n and n-1→n) and >>> they are 263 MiB on average. So for 12 versions and 6 RCs, that's >>> 30 IUKs and 7.7 GiB. >> >> Remember, we provide IUKs from the previous two *planned* releases, >> and any unplanned (i.e. emergency) releases in between, so the >> *minimum* number of IUKs per version is two. >> >> Also, this number is higher than it should be because we clean up >> IUKs every six months, not when Tails migrates to a new Debian >> version. If someone feels like it they could come up with a new >> number that takes that into account, and adds a few emergency >> releases (incl. the extra IUKs that implies for the following >> releases), but I'm happy with stating that 10 GiB seems enough. >> >>> - We have 3 IUKs for 3.0~betaX and will have at least 2 more >>> (beta4→rc1 and rc1→3.0) and they are significantly bigger. That's >>> 1.9 GiB. - We have 2 full ISO (2.12 and 3.0~beta4) and might have 3 >>> max if we include an RC. That's 3.0 GiB. >> >> Also, right around release n, both the n-1 and n ISOS will be on the >> mirrors, so that should be more like 4 GiB. >> >>> So that's 12.6 GiB. >> >> Finally, this number doesn't take into account the project/vagrant >> directory which currently is at 2 GiB, but OTOH we will soon be able >> to remove it, so let's ignore it. >> >>> We shouldn't discard publishing even more IUKs in the future (I >>> think anonym had some crazy plan about this somewhere). >> >> FWIW, with that vague, potential plan (#11131) it's expected that the >> space needed for (stable) IUKs will increase to 11 GiB. But those >> numbers are based on data for the 2.x series. With 3.x things can go >> either way: in general, our ISO is growing so we can expect larger >> IUKs; but 3.x will be reproducible, so we can expect IUKs to be >> smaller. We'll see! :) >> >>> 3. Have more explicit requirements. Apparently not every mirror has >>> good monitoring of their disk space, so putting a range as >>> requirement could lead to more failures than setting a strict >>> requirement. So what about updating our documentation to say >>> something like: >>> >>> "You will also need 15 GiB of disk space maximum." >> >> Disk space is cheap! My expectation is that for those that can offer >> to run a mirror, 15 GiB is nothing, and given your current >> (incorrect) approximation I think we're asking for too little. I say, >> let's go for 30 GiB, which I bet no mirror operator will mind >> providing, and as a bonus I believe we'd be ready for the "crazy >> plan" (#11131) in case we decide to go that way. > > Thanks for all the extra info! Summarizing your version we're talking about: > > - Official ISO 2 GiB > - Official IUK 11 GiB > - Testing ISO 2 GiB > - Testing IUK 2 GiB > > - TOTAL 17 GiB > > I also thought that we could assume that disk space is cheap but then I > rememered how much money we actually spending on disks and that always > freaks me out :) But right, mirror operators might not store all their > stuff on SSD like we do. > > I'm also not super happy to ask for much more than what we need (right > now three times more than what we use). But yeah, I guess that I'll bump > the number to 30 GiB, write all mirror operators and see if that's an > actual problem for some of them.
I asked them and nobody said it would be problematic. One answered that 20 GiB is a typical allocation for cheap VMs but that adding 10 extra GiB is about $1 a month more. So let's keep it like this. _______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to [email protected].
