cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pier Fumagalli <p...@betaversion.org>
Subject Re: [RT] Cocoon's own publishing system
Date Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:12:25 GMT
"Stefano Mazzocchi" <stefano@apache.org> wrote:

> So, here is the plan I propose:
> 
> 1) repository is CVS on icarus. as it is today. no changes required in
> the editing/authoring process (for now, at least)
> 
> 2) automated staging server is moof (or nagoya)
> 
> I'd suggest to install it on moof (or nagoya) [moof is a macosx server
> donated to the ASF by apple and located in their campus, lots of
> bandwidth and support for final java 1.4.1 as for yesterday, administred
> by the apache instrastructure]
> 
> Checkout is done over anoncvs, so no possible compromise from the
> staging server to the repository.

There are "few" problems with moof... I love that little bundle of fur,
but.... Memory is only 384 Mb and CPU is just 466 Mhz. It's the same system
I am running @ work, and it is kinda slow :-(

The other thing is that I still quite didn't figure out why it takes roughly
30 seconds to SSH to it... But that might be just some firewall problem.

I'd prefer to use Nago for the task, but (again), not before it gets updated
to Solaris 9 and VXFS. But nagoya, on the other hand, has a slower IO from
disks on multiple files (it doesn't really like GUMP). I need to see if VXFS
changes this...

> NOTE: from an operativity point of view, Pier has enough karma to setup
> everything we need on moof or nagoya, as well as providing accounts for
> those who want to help running the staging server (I would suspect Jeff
> and Steven to be interested in helping out, hopefully others as well).

Yes, here or there, PLEASE, I need help... And on Nago I can act pretty much
alone (I know every little bit of software installed on the machine, and
pretty confident on what goes on)...
 
> We might need to post our plan of action to infrastructure@ once we
> decide what to do, but since there are no security issues they shouldn't
> be concerned about it (I've already discussed this architecture and
> people didn't have objections).

+1...

    Pier


Mime
View raw message