[frgeek-michiana] Re: Warehouse Report - Sept. 15, 2011

  • From: "Tom Brown" <tbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <frgeek-michiana@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:42:49 -0400

Phil and I pulled the Supermicro 1U server out of the rack and popped the
hood. There is no room for a second drive, and the drive controller is IDE.
Phil has a 160 GB IDE drive which he is willing to let FGM use. 

 

Tom --

 

  _____  

From: frgeek-michiana-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:frgeek-michiana-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tony Germano
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 11:41
To: frgeek-michiana@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [frgeek-michiana] Re: Warehouse Report - Sept. 15, 2011

 

I used the script I found on this
(http://xlylith.blogspot.com/2006/02/size-of-ubuntu-repository.html) page to
check. Table is below. Looking at only 10.04 32-bit binaries it will be
about 45-50G. The 64-bit binaries are only slightly larger. I don't see a
reason to mirror source, so I didn't check sizes there. We would need
additional disk space for the host OS.

 

When I mentioned a "reference box" I was addressing the need if we were
using a package caching server instead of a mirror. While the repositories
are actually smaller than what I had thought, we will really only need a
very small fraction of what is available. Using a caching server instead of
a mirror, we should be able to fit both 32-bit and 64-bit versions on Tom's
existing hard drive.

 

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter to me which way we decide to go on
this.

 

i386-binary lucid main - 7.5G

i386-binary lucid restricted - < 1G

i386-binary lucid universe - 22.8G

i386-binary lucid multiverse - 2.6G

 

i386-binary lucid-updates main - 6.4G

i386-binary lucid-updates restricted - < 1G

i386-binary lucid-updates universe - 1.5G

i386-binary lucid-updates multiverse - < 1G

 

i386-binary lucid-security main - 4.1G

i386-binary lucid-security restricted - < 1G

i386-binary lucid-security universe - < 1G

i386-binary lucid-security multiverse - < 1G

 

Tony

 

 

  _____  

Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:30:21 -0400
Subject: [frgeek-michiana] Re: Warehouse Report - Sept. 15, 2011
From: ke4rit@xxxxxxxxx
To: frgeek-michiana@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

I know what I posted before (didn't catch the 40g for 2007) do we know about
what size drive we need for the mirror. I think I might have drives large
enough to test with here first...

Richard




On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Tom Brown <tbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There is a 1U Supermicro headless server with Ubuntu Server 10.04 LTS
installed and patched. At idle or full gallop it probably uses less energy
than the workshop server so it could be a good choice for 24/7 use.
Drawback: It needs a bigger HD.

 

I'm guessing it isn't possible to download and install the initial mirror in
one warehouse session so your offer to do those tasks looks helpful.

 

Tom --

 

  _____  

From: frgeek-michiana-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:frgeek-michiana-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Zimmerman
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:45
To: frgeek-michiana@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [frgeek-michiana] Re: Warehouse Report - Sept. 15, 2011

 

Actually no. The mirror maintainer runs a nightly script that keeps the
mirror in sync with the mater builds. When install a new Ubuntu install, you
over-ride the default mirrors in favor or your mirror. This way, you keep
the the traffic local and because you run nightly updates to the mirror it
the updates are also already local...

You don;t need a "Reference box" at all... Take the warehouse server and
make it a straight Ubuntu install and add the server tasks to it. Install
the mirror on the warehouse server and your job is done.

Richard

/ If it helps I have 15/3 Comcast internet again I can blast down the
initial mirror build if it helps... 

// Would probably recommend changing the warehouse server to Ubuntu so
everything is on the same page...

/// Is anyone maintaining the warehouse server anymore?


<Tony Wrote>
One thing to consider, though, is that package upgrades will be downloaded
on demand rather than proactively. That could mean that patches take longer
to download than we have time to apply them before we close the warehouse
for the night. Perhaps we can have a reference box running in a virtual
machine that can download patches during off hours so they are ready when
the warehouse opens?
</Tony>

--
Richard "Goose" Zimmerman, ke4rit
Mishawaka, IN




-- 

--
Richard "Goose" Zimmerman, ke4rit
Mishawaka, IN

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. frgeek-michiana
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2011