www-mirrors mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevin <spy...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: openoffice at apache.org
Date Tue, 20 Mar 2012 04:42:24 GMT
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Henk P. Penning <penning@uu.nl> wrote:
> Hi Apache Mirrors,
>
>  In june 2011 "openoffice" was established as an ASF Project.
>  Since then, many parts of openoffice.org have moved to the
>  apache.org (ASF) infrastructure. It is now time to think
>  about releasing "Apache OpenOffice".
>
>  One of the options for distributing Apache OpenOffice is to
>  put it on the apache mirrors, like all other Apache projects.
>
>  Impact on mirrors :
>
>  -- Space : disk space would go from (currently 40GB) to 80-100 GB.
>  -- Bandwidth : will go up a lot ; maybe 100-500 times more.
>
>  We realise that this can be a problem for some mirrors.
>
>  -- We think that disk-space isn't a big problem,
>     but tell us if it is.
>
>  -- We think that bandwidth can be a problem
>       ... except when you already have an openoffice.org mirror,
>       or  when you already mirror lots of other (big) projects.
>
>  If releasing "Apache OpenOffice" on Apache mirrors is a problem
>  for you, please let us know.

For us, the bandwidth isn't the problem, the disk space is. Since we
setup our Apache mirror many moons ago, our own disk needs have grown.

Sure, we've got a *some* space to spare, but adding another 40GB--much
less 80GB--would put a serious crunch on things for running our own
site.

Sadly, since the server is out of slots to add more disks, that's not
really an option, so it would mean a significant amount of effort,
i.e. we'd have to replace all the disks, reconfigure the RAID, and
reload from scratch. (Not to mention the downtime.)

So, as much as I'd love to mirror OO on this server, it's just not
practical right now; it would be ideal if one could just opt out of
the OO portion of the mirror.

I know there are a lot of other mirror admins in similar situations.
Perhaps disk space is an issue; perhaps bandwidth is. Whatever the
case, an opt out of some sort would be great.

Kevin

Mime
View raw message