The lead blog story on Alexa's front page today is about Wikipedia surpassing NY Times in terms of traffic rank. Traffic has spiked upwards in the last month, and sits at #66 for today.
BTW, the blogger discovered this through my del.icio.us and flickr tags, so keep tagging things out there as "wikipedia"
See: http://www.alexa.com http://tinyurl.com/6gsa3 (Wikipedia vs. NY Times)
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
Andrew Lih wrote:
The lead blog story on Alexa's front page today is about Wikipedia surpassing NY Times in terms of traffic rank. Traffic has spiked upwards in the last month, and sits at #66 for today.
BTW, the blogger discovered this through my del.icio.us and flickr tags, so keep tagging things out there as "wikipedia"
See: http://www.alexa.com http://tinyurl.com/6gsa3 (Wikipedia vs. NY Times)
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
And let's not forget Ask Jeeves, which has also been recently passed by Wikipedia. Considering that Ask Jeeves recently changed hands for almost $2BN, one might consider what "value" might be attached to Wikipedia's contributions to free knowledge. Now, that's philanthropy!
-- Neil
I think our next goal is cnn.com which has a daily reach (per million) of about 20,000. We have just broken 8000 and it is an open question of whether we can handle 10,000 or more with the current setup. However as we are running smoothly it is likely that equipment is not holding us back at this point.
Yes, we are GOOD. Worth billions...
Fred
From: Neil Harris usenet@tonal.clara.co.uk Reply-To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:13:43 +0100 To: Andrew Lih andrew.lih@gmail.com, wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Alexa.com blogs about Wikipedia
And let's not forget Ask Jeeves, which has also been recently passed by Wikipedia. Considering that Ask Jeeves recently changed hands for almost $2BN, one might consider what "value" might be attached to Wikipedia's contributions to free knowledge. Now, that's philanthropy!
-- Neil
Andrew Lih wrote:
The lead blog story on Alexa's front page today is about Wikipedia surpassing NY Times in terms of traffic rank. Traffic has spiked upwards in the last month, and sits at #66 for today.
I've just ordered another 20 servers for our Florida cluster, and with the recently announced Yahoo deal, as well as deals we are working on with some European educational/governmental organizations and another major search engine, we will within the next few months more than double our total capacity, and expand from 2 data centers (Florida, Paris) to 5 or 6 (Florida, somewhere in Asia, Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, and another).
Pretty neat.
:-)
It would be especially neat if we could get at least a little bit of server space somewhere in Africa, Australia, and South America.
Having said that, it would also be easy/nice to get server space in California or somewhere else in the Western US (Google would be California, would it not?)
I think that it's always best to have everything distributed over multiple locations in case of a disaster, natural or otherwise (this way, we won't have to worry about Wikipedia in hurricanes, and if one location gets broken into/burns down/explodes/disappears mysteriously in a puff of steam, Wikipedia will not have problems because of it).
Mark
On 4/14/05, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Andrew Lih wrote:
The lead blog story on Alexa's front page today is about Wikipedia surpassing NY Times in terms of traffic rank. Traffic has spiked upwards in the last month, and sits at #66 for today.
I've just ordered another 20 servers for our Florida cluster, and with the recently announced Yahoo deal, as well as deals we are working on with some European educational/governmental organizations and another major search engine, we will within the next few months more than double our total capacity, and expand from 2 data centers (Florida, Paris) to 5 or 6 (Florida, somewhere in Asia, Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, and another).
Pretty neat.
:-)
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Mark Williamson wrote:
It would be especially neat if we could get at least a little bit of server space somewhere in Africa, Australia, and South America.
Having said that, it would also be easy/nice to get server space in California or somewhere else in the Western US (Google would be California, would it not?)
I think that it's always best to have everything distributed over multiple locations in case of a disaster, natural or otherwise (this way, we won't have to worry about Wikipedia in hurricanes, and if one location gets broken into/burns down/explodes/disappears mysteriously in a puff of steam, Wikipedia will not have problems because of it).
Domas has been advocating further expansion of the Florida colo, and I can see his point. Even a 10ms RTT delay (say from Tampa to Miami) would have a large negative impact on performance if we tried to have a single memcached namespace stretching over both locations. Our idea for using the European and Asian data centres is to move entire wikis. Each wiki needs to be served by a master database server and a cluster of apaches in close proximity to each other.
Because of this need for clustering, I don't think we can reasonably expect to be able to cope with the Tampa colo disappearing without some reduction in performance. It's not worth having a slow wiki 365 days a year just so that we can recover quickly after a one in a million chance event. However, it's reasonable to expect that there will be no loss of data, and that we'll be able to get read-only service up fairly quickly.
Squid servers are a different story, they can be spread all over the world. There's no preference for clumping them together except for convenience of administration and maintenance. Performance-wise, it's better if they're near the users. That's why we've set up a page for organisations that wish to volunteer to host individual squids:
http://wp.wikidev.net/Volunteer_Squid_Sites
-- Tim Starling
That's why we've set up a page for
organisations that wish to volunteer to host individual squids:
Hmm, do we really want to do this, have individual squids?
I have been telling people no on the theory that it would not help much and would be an administrative nightmare.
--Jimbo
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 04:39:07PM -0700, Mark Williamson wrote:
It would be especially neat if we could get at least a little bit of server space somewhere in Africa, Australia, and South America.
Having said that, it would also be easy/nice to get server space in California or somewhere else in the Western US (Google would be California, would it not?)
I vote Washington state. I'd kinda like to move there, eventually, anyway.
Ha ha, only serious.
I think that it's always best to have everything distributed over multiple locations in case of a disaster, natural or otherwise (this way, we won't have to worry about Wikipedia in hurricanes, and if one location gets broken into/burns down/explodes/disappears mysteriously in a puff of steam, Wikipedia will not have problems because of it).
Mark
On 4/14/05, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Andrew Lih wrote:
The lead blog story on Alexa's front page today is about Wikipedia surpassing NY Times in terms of traffic rank. Traffic has spiked upwards in the last month, and sits at #66 for today.
I've just ordered another 20 servers for our Florida cluster, and with the recently announced Yahoo deal, as well as deals we are working on with some European educational/governmental organizations and another major search engine, we will within the next few months more than double our total capacity, and expand from 2 data centers (Florida, Paris) to 5 or 6 (Florida, somewhere in Asia, Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, and another).
Pretty neat.
-- Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Well, you know California is the home to the Silicon Valley, and we all know about Bomis' prior business experience with silicon valleys.
Mark
On 4/14/05, Chad Perrin perrin@apotheon.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 04:39:07PM -0700, Mark Williamson wrote:
It would be especially neat if we could get at least a little bit of server space somewhere in Africa, Australia, and South America.
Having said that, it would also be easy/nice to get server space in California or somewhere else in the Western US (Google would be California, would it not?)
I vote Washington state. I'd kinda like to move there, eventually, anyway.
Ha ha, only serious.
I think that it's always best to have everything distributed over multiple locations in case of a disaster, natural or otherwise (this way, we won't have to worry about Wikipedia in hurricanes, and if one location gets broken into/burns down/explodes/disappears mysteriously in a puff of steam, Wikipedia will not have problems because of it).
Mark
On 4/14/05, Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Andrew Lih wrote:
The lead blog story on Alexa's front page today is about Wikipedia surpassing NY Times in terms of traffic rank. Traffic has spiked upwards in the last month, and sits at #66 for today.
I've just ordered another 20 servers for our Florida cluster, and with the recently announced Yahoo deal, as well as deals we are working on with some European educational/governmental organizations and another major search engine, we will within the next few months more than double our total capacity, and expand from 2 data centers (Florida, Paris) to 5 or 6 (Florida, somewhere in Asia, Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris, and another).
Pretty neat.
-- Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org