[SAC] Space on Backup

[Martin Spott]

On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 01:46:59AM -0800, Alex Mandel wrote:
> On 02/04/2013 01:35 AM, Martin Spott wrote:

> Most of the critical files are actually on the other server. But I agree
> it's not ideal. I re-introduced the ideas I had on alleviating this
> issue in a previous thread but I've gathered almost no response, so I'm
> not sure where to go next.

It's probably my fault, but, to be honest, I'm unaware of anything
relevant to the discussion about OSGeo's future backup strategy which  
hasn't already been said.

The latest planning state *I* am aware of is to buy a third server 
focussing on as much disk space as possible and to find a home for it. 
We had a short discssion about wether the backup machine should reside  
off-site (which means not at OSL), making full backups difficult due to
network volume limitations or to install it at the same place, which
might result in trouble if the entire site would be affected by major
damage.
Anyhow, I'd say the second solution would still be better by magnitudes
compared to the current state.  As far as I (vaguely) remember, you
were planning to negotiate with OSUOSL about hosting the third machine.

Without looking at the mail archives I'm pretty certain that the above
is just a repeating the result of past discussions.  If the focus has
shifted, then I probably missed it.

> Really we just need to reduced the influx of data from some of the less
> critical applications. I'm not sure how to be more aggressive about
> this, other than only backing up designated locations and telling
> projects to dump critical data there.

Well, that's a communication issue.  According to my knowledge,
projects had (without negotiations on a consent) been told to put
*everything* into /osgeo/, no matter how sensitive it was and I felt
really strong headwind when I was calling for a more nuanced directory
structure.  Therefore I think I'm not going to join this discussion
again but instead leave it to others.

Cheers,
	Martin.
-- 
 Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------