[OSGeo-Discuss] Upgrade Planning 2014 - Project Feedback

[Jeff McKenna]

I think this call should also go to our Local Chapters around the world
(from traveling to local chapters, I know that they face challenges as
our infrastructure is currently just based in North America).

Sending...

-jeff



On 2014-04-18, 8:50 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
> Calling all Project Steering Committees, SAC is looking at the future of
> OSGeo hosted services. Please chime in with your wants and needs for the
> next 3-5 years. We want to maximize services while being efficient about
> effort (pooling sys admin time amongst projects).
> 
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Transition_Plan_2014
> 
> More details below.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alex
> OSGeo Sys Admin Committee Chair
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [SAC] Upgrade Planning 2014
> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 15:25:41 -0700
> From: Alex Mandel <tech_dev at wildintellect.com>
> Reply-To: tech at wildintellect.com, System Administration Committee
> Discussion/OSGeo <sac at lists.osgeo.org>
> To: System Administration Committee Discussion/OSGeo <sac at lists.osgeo.org>
> 
> In light of our recent hardware woes, the ending of osgeo1, and the age
> of current machines (3-4yrs) I think it's time to start planning what to
> do next.
> 
> We do have budget, and the board is interested in ideas and additional
> funding is not out of the question.
> 
>>From my perspective, I think we need:
> 1. To survey PSC of all projects to assess what services we should
> offer. Do we need buildbots, sphinx builds, mail service, issue
> tracking, various CMS/wiki, mirrors, bandwidth for downloads? Now that
> everyone is love with Github (any word on what the next hot host will
> be), are there things we should retire?
> 
> 2. Look at other hosting options besides physical machines in one place.
> Renting space like QGIS or OSM, racking machines elsewhere, getting
> OSGeo-ICA labs to mirror. If we do mirror look at GeoCDN and MirrorBrain
> for geo-ip redirection balancing.
> 
> 3. Look at new hardware that better meets the needs. RAID is nice but
> not always the right answer to needs as we discovered recently. We also
> didn't buy specific to Ganeti/Cloud style setups where hotcopy failover
> works best with multiple identical machines, and lots of smaller disks
> with single disks per VM keeps i/o from competing (RAID is handled in
> mirror mode via DRBD over the network between nodes).
> 
> Anyone want to tackle making a short survey for Projects to describe
> their needs and wishes?
> 
> 
> All ideas welcome, we'll pool it all into proposal and a wiki page
> before deciding on anything.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alex
> __________