[Labs-l] Yet another partial labs outage

[Petr Bena]

Because it's labs :P

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:17 PM, Maximilian Doerr
<maximilian.doerr at gmail.com> wrote:
> Why is labs constantly failing.  My bots keep dying! WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!! :p
>
> Cyberpower678
> English Wikipedia Account Creation Team
> Mailing List Moderator
>
>
>
> On May 17, 2015, at 14:10, Petr Bena <benapetr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Note: my previous mail was not intended to Gerard, but all people who
> complains about this :)
>
> Also tool-labs may be a little exception here, high availability is
> expected there but this tool was hosted somewhere else though.
>
> On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Petr Bena <benapetr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree with Ryan on this, if it's production stuff it shouldn't run
> on labs unless you are OK with outages. There is number of things that
> are more or less considered production, like wm-bot or huggle's
> components, but none of them are critical and it's not a big deal to
> have occasional outage. If your service must be 24/7 it should be on
> production servers and operation team needs to be trained how to
> operate it to ensure high availability. If you fail to do that, you
> can't blame labs people, just yourself.
>
> On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hoi,
> Saying a similar service is not recognising the FACT that production grade
> services are running on Labs. They are. Stating that something similar is
> worked on does NOT mean that it will indeed replace what is in FACT used in
> a production manner. Because that means that it is a development criteria to
> actually replace the functionality itself.
>
> I do solute the Labs people in that they have improved the stability of WDQ
> a lot. They did puppetise the services needed for running many of the tools,
> they made additional memory available and they collaborated with Magnus on
> making the services more robust.
>
> However, functionality in the pipeline is not what is being used and,
> theories of what production means is not really what you can observe. They
> are theories and as such not reliable.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
> On 17 May 2015 at 08:23, Tim Landscheidt <tim at tim-landscheidt.de> wrote:
>
>
> Ryan Lane <rlane32 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [WDQ]
>
>
> If it's production-ish, it should likely either be moved to production
> or
> you should put a bit of effort into making it work across multiple
> instances. The ideal goal is for services to be stateless, with their
> state
> living in databases that are also split across instances. It's best to
> have
> the service config managed (ideally puppetized since it's what wikimedia
> uses) so that a loss of an instance is only a brief inconvenience.
>
>
> There are efforts to deploy a similar service with
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikibase/Indexing (Phabrica-
> tor project at
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/wikidata-query-service/).
>
> Tim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Labs-l mailing list
> Labs-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
>