fedorahosted / collab plans and progress

[seth vidal]

On Mon, 5 Dec 2011 12:30:31 -0700
Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> wrote:

> Greetings. 
> 
> Our nice timetable of events for migrating collab01/02 and hosted01
> ran into a monkey wrench the other week when we had to replace our new
> hardware again. We've made progress on the new new hardware and here's
> where we stand: 
> 
> * I've installed a hosted02 on serverbeach06. This is a rhel5 clone of
>   hosted01. This is mostly just to make sure if anything happens to
>   hosted01 we are still able to bring something up quick. 
> 
> * I've installed a collab03 (sb08) and collab04 (sb09). I've set them
>   up with a drdb device for /srv to keep them in sync. The idea is
> that collab03 will be primary and in case anything fails, collab04
> will be there to bring up quickly. 
> 
> * I plan to install a hosted03 later today. (rhel6, hosted01
>   replacement). 
> 
> I'd like to get things moved sooner rather than later. Also, we are
> starting to push up against the holiday season. So, I am proposing: 
> 
> 2011-12-12 (1 week away): collab move. (collab01 -> collab03)
> 
> 2011-12-14 (next wed): hosted move. (hosted01 -> hosted03)
> 
> Outstanding questions: 
> 
> 1. When do we want to move the lists.fedorahosted.org? on the 12th?
> the 14th? or some other time entirely? We are going to need to get
> collab03 able to handle the additional domain and data. 
> 
> 2. On hosted, do we want to still change all projects to use
> project.fedorahosted.org ? Or should we perhaps just wait on that
> change? We could do that change on a per project opt in basis as we
> move them to other instances, possibly with less disruption. On the
> other hand, doing it now means we are ready to move things down the
> road. 
> 
> From our testing on hosted03 before we had to rebuild, the rhel5/rhel6
> upgrade seemed to go pretty smoothly from all I could tell. 
> 
> Any other gotchas, ideas, or things we could setup to test? 


I think the timing is fine - but if hosted03 and collab03 are all up
and happy now I would like to suggest we do some IO/cpu tests to beat
them up a bit. I'd rather like to know that they're going to survive a
fair amount of load before we spring users onto them.


-sv
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20111206/0ef79a8e/attachment.bin