incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Registration and Update Services - What Will Be The Load?
Date Wed, 15 Aug 2012 16:54:00 GMT
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:

>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 8:50 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann
> > <orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 15.08.2012 16:00, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Apologies to the Apache Infra team, the load caused by implementing
> >>> INFRA-5112 caused trouble.
> >>>
> >>> The changes to update*.services.openoffice.org to point to
> >>> www.openoffice.org
> >>> was reverted.
> >>>
> >>> This was due to added load on the Apache Infrastructure.
> >>>
> >>> Before we can proceed with INFRA-5112 and INFRA-5144 we absolutely must
> >>> have
> >>> some estimates about the volume of requests that will be received.
> >>>
> >>
> >> When I saw the problems on www.openoffice.org in the morning I already
> >> suggested that this might be related to the established redirects. I
> >> reported my assumption at #asfinfra in the morning.
> >> If I remembering it correct, Kay S. and Joe S. already observed
> something
> >> like this earlier this year.
> >>
>

Well as we kept going backward from 3.3 on down, I was wondering if we
might run into problems again...

The problem with the 3.0 update was that the "call" was a POST, which is
disallowed on Apache, and yes, brought the Apache web server (all of it,
not just the OO site) to its knees, instead of a GET for the update XML.

So, based on this notice, it seems 3.1 might use a POST also? If so,
there's nothing we can do vis a vis enacting this update for end users.


>> Unfortunately, I can not provide any volume.
> >> In the past more than 100 million download of OpenOffice.org package had
> >> been counted by the OpenOffice.org community. I do not know how much OOo
> >> installation are really active and how the distribution between the
> >> different versions are.
> >>
> >> What I know is the following:
> >> (1) update38.services.openoffice.org is used by OOo 3.4 Beta and
> released
> >> AOO 3.4 - a redirect for it has been established at 2012-05-21 and the
> >> traffic can be handled.
> >> (2) update36.services.openoffice.org is used by OOo 3.3 - a redirect
> for it
> >> has been established at 2012-06-04 and the traffic can be handled.
> >> (3) update35|34.services.openoffice.org is used by OOo 3.2.1 and OOo
> 3.2 -
> >> redirects for then have been established at 2012-07-12 and the traffic
> can
> >> be handled.
> >> (4) update33.services.openoffice.org is _not_ used - a redirect is
> _not_
> >> necessary. Does occur any traffic on this URL?
> >> (5) update32.services.openoffice.org is used by OOo 3.1.1 and OOo 3.1
> - a
> >> redirect has been requested and was established today. Due to the server
> >> load it has been reverted. Is the traffic data available?
> >> (6) update31.services.openoffice.org is _not_ used - a redirect is
> _not_
> >> necessary. Does occur any traffic on this URL?
> >> (7) update30.services.openoffice.org is used by OOo 3.0.1 and OOo 3.0.
> Does
> >> occur any traffic on this URL?
> >> (8) update.services.openoffice.org seems to be used by OOo 2.x version
> (at
> >> least my test installation of OOo 2.2 uses it). Is the traffic data
> >> available? When I remember it correct Kay S. and Joe S. observed the
> above
> >> mentioned problems earlier this year with this URL.
> >>
> >> Is it possible that somebody from the Apache Infrastructure can provide
> a
> >> view on which URL the traffic load was soo high that the servers got in
> >> trouble?
> >>
> >
> > That would be good to know.  Once we know we could verify behavior
> > with a change to a local hosts file.  One scenario that could
> > conceivably cause a problem would be if some old version of OOo
> > behaved badly when it gets a 404 error, such as getting into a retry
> > loop.   We know this did not happen for OOo 3.3.0, 3.2.1 or 3.2.0.
> > But it is worth confirming with earlier versions, if the HTTP logs
> > suggest this is happening.
>
> We'll have access to full logs tonight / tomorrow.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >> Best regards, Oliver.
>
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think."
                                                                        --
Niels Bohr

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message