I can barely stand to refer to the current wiki server as "the current wiki server", and I don't even know how I'll refer to the new server. I'd like to give the servers official names, just so I can refer to them in a single word.
Any suggestions?
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 11:19:10AM -0700, Jason Richey wrote:
I can barely stand to refer to the current wiki server as "the current wiki server", and I don't even know how I'll refer to the new server. I'd like to give the servers official names, just so I can refer to them in a single word.
Any suggestions?
How about "sweat" and "tears", or "pain" and "agony"? ;)
Jason Richey wrote:
I can barely stand to refer to the current wiki server as "the current wiki server", and I don't even know how I'll refer to the new server. I'd like to give the servers official names, just so I can refer to them in a single word.
I propose db.wikipedia.org for the backend and some system like www1.wikipedia.org for the frontend (web) server. These are internal names, not for the public, because of course the public doesn't care about that.
In this way, when we add more frontend machines (inevitable) and a loadbalancing system, we will have a good naming scheme, www2, www3 and so on.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 11:36:27AM -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Jason Richey wrote:
I can barely stand to refer to the current wiki server as "the current wiki server", and I don't even know how I'll refer to the new server. I'd like to give the servers official names, just so I can refer to them in a single word.
I propose db.wikipedia.org for the backend and some system like www1.wikipedia.org for the frontend (web) server. These are internal names, not for the public, because of course the public doesn't care about that.
In this way, when we add more frontend machines (inevitable) and a loadbalancing system, we will have a good naming scheme, www2, www3 and so on.
But these names are sooo boring ;-) And they don't follow RFC 1178.
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
But these names are sooo boring ;-) And they don't follow RFC 1178.
You're right, and I retract my suggestion completely if someone comes up with something more fun and standards-compliant! :-)
Famous encyclopedists?
Pliny, Vincent of Beavais, Denis Diderot, Jimbo? (ha ha)
Or, how about, for an infinite supply of names, we use various incarnations of Lir
Lir, Adam, Bridget, Vera Cruz, Ril, etc., etc., etc., etc.!!!
--Jimbo
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 12:14:35PM -0700, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
But these names are sooo boring ;-) And they don't follow RFC 1178.
You're right, and I retract my suggestion completely if someone comes up with something more fun and standards-compliant! :-)
Famous encyclopedists?
Pliny, Vincent of Beavais, Denis Diderot, Jimbo? (ha ha)
Or, how about, for an infinite supply of names, we use various incarnations of Lir
Lir, Adam, Bridget, Vera Cruz, Ril, etc., etc., etc., etc.!!!
"helga" would be a wonderful name, don't you think ? ;)
(Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com):
You're right, and I retract my suggestion completely if someone comes up with something more fun and standards-compliant! :-) Famous encyclopedists?
Pliny, Vincent of Beavais, Denis Diderot, Jimbo? (ha ha)
...don't forget Mortimer Adler. Besides, having a server named mortimer is about as nerdy as it's possible to get.
Jimmy Wales wrote:
In this way, when we add more frontend machines (inevitable) and a loadbalancing system, we will have a good naming scheme, www2, www3 and so on.
And for the mailserver (mailinglists) e.g. mail.
Have you enought IP - Addresses to give the mail-service it's own? Then you can add an additional IP to one of the servers. If somethink goes wrong, only move the IP Address to get the service running on the other machine. You can also have a mailinglist service preinstalled on the second machine.
Smurf
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org