We can try to keep the sign up open for everybody. However the problem with that is the pure amount of data those users will create.
However there might be other reasons why LDAP is not suited, for instance that we don't want that anybody enters his Apache Password into our application. We can discuss this when there is actually a server. Sebastian 2013/9/24 Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> > Hello Sebastian, > > Why do we need this limitation: "Apache Ldap, so that only PMC can login"? > > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 4:46 PM, seba.wag...@gmail.com < > seba.wag...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Tony, > > > > this sounds all very reasonable. > > > > The bottleneck in our calculations are often bandwidth requirements. > > Memory/disk usage does pretty much scale linear with number of users, but > > bandwidth does more like exponential with the number of concurrent > > sessions. > > > > However I would not be too concerned about the bandwidth, this server is > > basically for functional verification, not for load tests. > > On an average daily peak there might be maybe 10-20, on a quartly year > peak > > there might be up to 50 people online at the same time. > > > > One of the goals would be for instance to run automated Selenium tests > > against the server and have a daily builder scripts that installes > nightly > > snapshots of the application. > > > > So this should be sufficient for our needs. > > > > My suggestion would be that we use the LDAP connector of OpenMeetings to > > integration with the Apache Ldap, so that only PMC can login. This is > > something we can set up once we have the server, however we might need > some > > pointers from Infra to get the right urls/configs in place. > > > > Thanks! > > Sebastian > > > > > > > > 2013/9/24 Tony Stevenson <t...@pc-tony.com> > > > > > Ultimately we will need a spec for the VM yes. However it is infra who > > > will approve the spec in the first instance. The only real > restrictions > > > are: > > > > > > 1 - available resources on the physical host > > > 2 - subject to fair use of the resources > > > 3 - we oblige any local restrictions (providers etc) > > > > > > So in my head I woudl say something like : > > > > > > 2-4 vcpus > > > 8 GB RAM max (needs some level of justification) > > > 100GB disk > > > and reasonable use of bandwidth > > > > > > I know these might be inappropriate - but these are nothing more than > > > starting points for the conversation to start. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > On 24/09/13 08:49, seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >> I think they are waiting for a spec. > > >> However I am still a bit confused who needs to approve that spec? > > >> Do we need the ASF board to approve that spec? > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> Sebastian > > >> > > >> > > >> 2013/9/24 Maxim Solodovnik <solomax...@gmail.com> > > >> > > >> Dear Tony, > > >>> > > >>> Are the any updates on this topic? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Tony Stevenson <t...@pc-tony.com> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> We need to get a vmware host specced up, agreed, purchased, > delivered, > > >>>> racked, installed, configured, a VM created etc, > > >>>> Once we know this is what we want to do we will need to allow ~1 > month > > >>>> turn-around time. Maybe 6 weeks. > > >>>> > > >>>> Primarily the delay is in the order, racking, and installing stages. > > >>>> But > > >>>> also bear in mind our new EU colo has very few services in it. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On 7 Jun 2013, at 07:19, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com> > > >>>> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Artyom, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Tony said, > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> actually someone just reminded me that our new EU colo provider > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> has enough bandwidth to cope with your request - however it is not > > >>>>> > > >>>> QoSed > > >>> > > >>>> so it cannot be guaranteed - but giving the amount they made > available > > >>>>> to us I dont think you would make a significant dent in that. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Tony, what would be our next step to set up the server at EU colo > > >>>>> > > >>>> provider? > > >>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, > > >>>>> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, > > >>>>> http://dataved.ru/ > > >>>>> +7 916 562 8095 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Alexei Fedotov > > >>>>> <alexei.fedo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Tony, as I have said, the requirements are not as important as the > > >>>>>> fact we have the server running. For those who feel that bandwidth > > is > > >>>>>> not enough or is not reliable enough there is always an option to > > >>>>>> switch to other test servers (or install their own server). We may > > add > > >>>>>> a warning message at the welcome screen. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> As for your previous question, my AWS bills for two test servers > are > > >>>>>> ~$30 per month though micro-instance is kinda slow, and hetzner > > bills > > >>>>>> are approx. ~$30 per server. For 100 Mbit/s connected server > located > > >>>>>> in Russia (with higher hosting costs) I pay 250$ / month. > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, > > >>>>>> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, > > >>>>>> http://dataved.ru/ > > >>>>>> +7 916 562 8095 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Tony Stevenson < > pct...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Tony Stevenson wrote on Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 06:46:55PM +0100: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Alexei Fedotov wrote on Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 09:32:12PM +0400: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Tony, I'm sorry. This was discussed for sure. Things sometimes > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> change over > > >>>> > > >>>>> time, that's why I have asked once again. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> We have have several test servers and chat channels hosted > > around. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> My > > >>> > > >>>> intention was to have more > > >>>>>>>>> development resources hosted @apache and branded by apache. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Generally that is a good thing. However your requirements are > > >>>>>>>> significant, and this is not something we could in all good > faith > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> commit > > >>>> > > >>>>> too. Sorry. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Alexi, actually someone just reminded me that our new EU colo > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> provider > > >>> > > >>>> has enough bandwidth to cope with your request - however it is not > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> QoSed > > >>>> > > >>>>> so it cannot be guaranteed - but giving the amount they made > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> available > > >>> > > >>>> to us I dont think you would make a significant dent in that. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The only issue now is the lack of hardware in this location to > > 'make > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> it > > >>> > > >>>> so'. We could look at purchasing a new box for the site, but we > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> wouldnt > > >>> > > >>>> be able to guarantee you the 25% of the server you wanted, and it > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> would > > >>> > > >>>> be a virtual machine that we'd give you. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The colo would be in Europe, specifically in Germany. Would this > > be > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> an > > >>> > > >>>> issue for you? > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Please let us know, and I *might* be able to carry this forward. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Please do not mis-read my reply - I was trying to be open and > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> honest. > > >>> > > >>>> While over time we might well be able to offer you all the hardware > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> you > > >>>> > > >>>>> need, it is so very extremely unlikely we could meet your > bandwidth > > >>>>>>>> needs. All our bandwidth is donated to us for free, and as such > it > > >>>>>>>> doesnt come in huge quantities; and where we do have it we have > to > > >>>>>>>> prioritise core services over that of development instances > (i.e. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> svn > > >>> > > >>>> and http over that of pmc specific needs). It's not that we dont > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> want > > >>> > > >>>> to help, but we only have finite resources, and we need to be > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> careful > > >>> > > >>>> not to over commit them. Bandwith is one such commodity where we > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> need > > >>> > > >>>> to be careful. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> One option that springs to mind is the use of AWS and friends, > > while > > >>>>>>>> they will not guarantee you the resources you want I suspect you > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> might > > >>> > > >>>> get somewhere close most of the time. Though again, if you need > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> these > > >>> > > >>>> as > > >>>> > > >>>>> a minimum resource at all times we will have to look elsewhere. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> There might be some money free in the budget to allow you to use > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> such > > >>> > > >>>> a > > >>>> > > >>>>> service. Before we throw up n VMs in an attempt to guess if it > will > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> work > > >>>> > > >>>>> for you, can you perhaps go back to your PMC and discuss the idea > of > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> VMs > > >>>> > > >>>>> with the likes of AWS, and when you find a vendor please do a > little > > >>>>>>>> research into the options, then let us know what you want to do. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Please > > >>>> > > >>>>> note that the budget is not endless, and if you want to saturate > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> 20Mb/s > > >>>> > > >>>>> or more, then I guess the bill from AWS will be significant and > you > > >>>>>>>> might not get a lot of AWS time as a reuslt - so please look > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> carefully > > >>> > > >>>> and come back to us with options and we can take those forward for > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> you. > > >>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I'm pushing this back to you to do the research as we are kinda > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> snowed > > >>> > > >>>> under somewhat and if you can do this part we might just be able to > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> say > > >>>> > > >>>>> "go for it" and let you have at it. I stress 'might' :) > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>>>> Tony > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> ------------------------------**---- > > >>>>>>>> Tony Stevenson > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> t...@pc-tony.com > > >>>>>>>> pct...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> http://www.pc-tony.com > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> GPG - 1024D/51047D66 > > >>>>>>>> ------------------------------**---- > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>>> Tony > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> ------------------------------**---- > > >>>>>>> Tony Stevenson > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> t...@pc-tony.com > > >>>>>>> pct...@apache.org > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> http://www.pc-tony.com > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> GPG - 1024D/51047D66 > > >>>>>>> ------------------------------**---- > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers, > > >>>> Tony > > >>>> > > >>>> ------------------------------**---- > > >>>> Tony Stevenson > > >>>> > > >>>> t...@pc-tony.com > > >>>> pct...@apache.org > > >>>> > > >>>> http://www.pc-tony.com > > >>>> > > >>>> GPG - 1024D/51047D66 > > >>>> ------------------------------**---- > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> WBR > > >>> Maxim aka solomax > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Tony > > > > > > ------------------------------**---- > > > Tony Stevenson > > > > > > t...@pc-tony.com > > > pct...@apache.org > > > > > > http://www.pc-tony.com > > > GPG - 1024D/51047D66 > > > ------------------------------**---- > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sebastian Wagner > > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock > > http://www.webbase-design.de > > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com > > seba.wag...@gmail.com > > > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax > -- Sebastian Wagner https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock http://www.webbase-design.de http://www.wagner-sebastian.com seba.wag...@gmail.com
