so it's fairly common that users want to host larger projects on the toolserver, but for various reasons we haven't been comfortable doing that on hemlock. i thought about this a bit, and came up with this:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Toolserver/Special_projects
if you're interested, or think this would be useful, please feel free to comment on the page.
- river.
Personally I love the idea. Would this be an on application system where you are allowed more than the standard memory/processor/etc limits? Also, to double check, this would be running a lot of intensive stuff and such? Such as if someone wanted to run a long script to process something, rather than running on hemlock and slowing down everyone, running it there using more memory etc without damaging other scripts?
I'd just like to clarify exactly what this is for. -Matt
From: river@wikimedia.org> To: toolserver-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 07:14:16 +0100> Subject: [Toolserver-l] special projects server (asterisk, etc.)> > so it's fairly common that users want to host larger projects on the > toolserver, but for various reasons we haven't been comfortable doing that on > hemlock. i thought about this a bit, and came up with this:> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Toolserver/Special_projects%3E > if you're interested, or think this would be useful, please feel free to > comment on the page.> > - river.
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
The Fearow:
Would this be an on application system where you are allowed more than the standard memory/processor/etc limits?
yes, although obviously there are still limits based on available hardware.
Also, to double check, this would be running a lot of intensive stuff and such?
not necessarily intensive, but larger or more complicated (e.g. that can't easily be run from a normal user account).
i was thinking of something more than just long scripts, but maybe.
- river.
but for various reasons we haven't been comfortable doing that on hemlock.
Is it the problem only with large projects like that one requiring Asterisk, while all other stuff will remain on hemlock? Or will hemlock serve only web-scripts, while all other things such as python bots will be placed on new server?
— Kalan
I like the idea. If we have hardware that is not being used, let's make use of it.
Sean
On 07/10/2007, River Tarnell river@wikimedia.org wrote:
So we finally have some place to host the CS server? :P
On 10/7/07, River Tarnell river@wikimedia.org wrote:
Seriously though, maybe OpenVZ? I know that that is used by some of the larger virtual server host companies. I have only used it as a user, but it allows you fairly everything as a root, except for modifying the kernel. Or does river want to get rid of linux?
Bryan
Sounds like fun :) I'm just horrible at CS.
Ideally we should allow total VM control - something that runs a total new OS. That way if for instance someone wants to run something important that is restricted to only one operating system, we can easily run it. The problem comes when you have multiple people with webservers - the server would have to map different target addresses to different virtual machines. Not too hard, and could possibly be done routerside.
-Matt
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
On 10/7/07, The Fearow fearow00@hotmail.com wrote:
No thank you, I like to avoid pain.
We already have enough problems with users setting up widely used tools then losing interest leaving the tools unmaintained. I wouldn't want to scale that up to complete operating systems.
We already have some 5 operating systems used in various parts of Wikimedia infrastructure adding more is just not desirable even if it's for an ancillary server.
Really, I think if we do the special projects thing it should be done more with a focus on making things scalable, maintainable, and generally production grade. .. and getting there usually means simplicity, consistency, learnability, and documentation. "Lets give people a hosted VM to screw around with" is just the wrong direction, IMO.
I would NEVER install Vista on ANY pc, except maybe Bill Gates' computer. It's a horror I wouldnt wish on anyone but him! (even not on people I hate)
-Matt
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
toolserver-l@lists.wikimedia.org