[SAC] New Vms w/ Debian 7

[Alex Mandel]

I agree this is a good time to remind people that if they have specific
needs, such as things that adhoc is currently used for, then they need
to speak up.

1. Document what they use it for
2. Document what if anything they want backed up
3. Add to the wish list what they want to be able to do
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Transition_Plan_2014

The current defacto policy, we don't back it up unless you explicitly
asked for it to be backed up. We may also require assistance prepping
the files for backup if say a db backup is required. Obviously we are
backing some stuff up, but I'm not confident that we could really
restore a machine 100% from it.

As we're discovering, full backups of everything is unrealistic. It just
leads to dismal performance and overuse of the hardware. There are also
2 levels to consider:
1. Failover copy (we don't currently do this - mirrors is one
option,drbd another)
2. An actual archive backup used to build a fresh machine (this is the
current backup system)

Option 2 when needed does involve significant downtime to restore and
participation by the people who set up a machine to start. It seems what
more people really want is Option 1. In my mind that requires actual
planning in the next round of hardware or services.

Anyone willing to be in charge of surveying projects and touching base
with all the PSC? Get them to participate in:
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Transition_Plan_2014

Thanks,
Alex

On 05/09/2014 02:48 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
> Is this a good time to remind everyone of the
> heavily-used-yet-not-supported AdhocVM?
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/AdhocVM Several projects rely on this VM
> heavily, yet there are no backups etc.  This has been reminded to me
> recently by another community member.  So, I'm nudging :)
> 
> -jeff
> 
> 
> 
> On 2014-05-09, 4:20 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
>> We're currently stuck in a weird spot with trying to upgrade to Debian
>> 7, a relic of the original VM disk layout that doesn't get along with GRUB2.
>>
>> The fastest way to get there seems to be to do a new Base VM based on
>> debian 7 and clone it. This would be a good idea if we want to start
>> making smaller VMs to split apart some services into more isolation.
>> On the one hand its more VMs or containers to deal with, on the other it
>> might bring happy faces and stability to more things.
>>
>> Our other option is some hackery to try and make current Vms upgradeable.
>>
>> Currently the only requests I've heard for a new VM is from QGIS who
>> wants to remove their cruft from the existing VM by starting fresh
>> (since they moved all but 2 sites to another server elsewhere anyways).
>>
>> I wouldn't be opposed to some others moving off of Projects in a similar
>> manner. We can worry about the main osgeo services separately.
>>
>> This of course leaves some questions:
>> Who can help setup the new base vm?
>> Should we implement puppet or chef, etc to make managing more servers
>> easier?
>> Should we consider using LXC containers to isolate projects from each
>> other on a common kernel?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> Sac mailing list
> Sac at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac
>