[Labs-l] Yet another partial labs outage

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
It may not be intended for me but there is no manner in which functionality
that is widely used and that can be easily described as of importance to
the smooth running of a project can be moved to production servers and get
production grade support.

Given that the WMF itself first has to identify them as such before it is
actually moved on its agenda it is easy to understand why it never happens.
The next bit is that WMF is fixated on Wikipedia thinking and consequently
it does not make for a great transition to "production" think either.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 17 May 2015 at 20:08, 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/labs-l/attachments/20150518/efbe144c/attachment-0001.html>