*Simple.wikipedia is nothing like en.wikipedia* I care to dispute that statement, All WMF wikis are setup basically the same (an odd extension here or there is different, and different namespace names at times) but for the purpose of recovery simplewiki_p is a very standard example. this issue isnt just about enwiki_p but *all* wmf wikis. Doing a data recovery for enwiki vs simplewiki is just a matter of time, for enwiki a 5 day estimate would be fairly standard (depending on server setup) and lower times for smaller databases. typically you can explain it in a rate of X revisions processed per Y time unit, regardless of the project. and that rate should be similar for everything given the same hardware setup.
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:30 AM, John <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ill run a quick benchmark and import the full history of > simple.wikipedia to > > my laptop wiki on a stick, and give an exact duration > > Simple.wikipedia is nothing like en.wikipedia. For one thing, there's > no need to turn on $wgCompressRevisions with simple.wikipedia. > > Is $wgCompressRevisions still used? I haven't followed this in quite a > while. > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
