Hi, First of all thanks for your answer, it's really appreciated to have more details.
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 07:51:21PM +0000, Luca Filipozzi wrote: > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 07:14:25PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 03:28:04PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 02:19:07PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: > > > > However, using words like "known-buggy mips* machines" is just FUD > > > > against the mips*-ports, and plainly inacceptable, so please stop > > > > doing that. (For reference, there is no mipsel machine which has > > > > hardware bugs affecting daily operations. There are two mips machines > > > > which are pre-series and are not as stable as I wish, but as builddadm > > > > I was more occupied recently with arm* machines not stable then with > > > > mips machines not stable. This all doesn't mean I think nothing should > > > > be changed, but please do not FUD against mips* (or any other > > > > architecture).) > > > > > > builddadm does not keep the machines running, DSA does. ball is ancient, > > > > I agree that ball, rem and mayer are indeed ancient. That said despite > > their age, they are about twice faster as armel and armhf build daemons > > for building for example libreoffice or qt4-x11. Does they cause any > > problem from the administration point of view? > > The mipsel machines are working reliably but are probably not replacable if > one > dies. They could use more memory and it'd be helpful if they booted from SATA > (so that we can source new disks if/when the current PATA disks die). For the record, I have a ready to use swarm system that can be used as a spare if needed and shipped from France, plus a few PATA disks. It clearly don't fix the issue, but it might be useful in case something happen in the very short term. We are currently working on long term a solution for both mips and mipsel. You should get some news about the mipsel one very soon. > > > corelli and gabrielli are unstable under load and lucatelli does need > > > occasional reboots too, IIRC. > > > > I agree that corelli and gabrielli are unstable, though it's clearly not > > related with the load. I am not aware of any issue with lucatelli, do > > you have some more details? > > Of the four Movidis mips machines that I received at ubcece, one was dead on > arrival, > two have proven unreliable and only one is stable. All four were received > with > notes indicating that their eth0 was faulty, suggesting that they failed QA. > The one that is stable is often so overloaded that we can't actually run any > of > our regular system administration tasks since the entire system is just > thrashing > (because there are 2 buildd instances running concurrently, and g++ with large > parallelism just eats memory) I have reduced a bit the parallelism on lucatelli, I hope it will fix/reduce the problem. Regards, Aurelien -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurel...@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131229204910.gh15...@hall.aurel32.net