Re: Translation status pages

2005-10-08 Thread Lucas Vieites
El vie, 07-10-2005 a las 20:12 +0200, Danilo Šegan escribió:
 Today at 5:20, Owen Taylor wrote:
[...]
 It does do significant disk work: it basically checks out entire gnome
 cvs, runs intltool-update -p and then msgmerge on every single PO
 file in Gnome CVS  repository (sometimes for multiple branches) and
 creates hundreds of static .html files containing statistics.
 

  Creation of hundreds of static .html files seems like a prehistoric
thing to do. Would it be too complicated to create a few xml files with
the statistics data (or maybe insert it in a database) and then generate
the html dinamically (to avoid too much intensive db access, these could
be cached upon generation to avoid duplication). The flow would be like
this:

  -process generates data (xml or sql)
  -user accesses a page first time (eg. /gnome-2.12/es/desktop/)
-php generates the page from data and stores it in a temp dir
  -other user visits the same page
-it gets shown from the temp dir (no duplicate generation, no db
overhead)
  -temp dir gets erased every time the process runs

  Questions:
  -Pages that are never visited never get generated, is this a pro or a
con?
  -Is this really less cpu intensive? I don't know if the sum of cpu
time for all the pages that are visited (for the first time) is less
than what we have now.

  Anyway, it's just an idea, I would volunteer to help with this if
possible.

  Cheers,
  Lucas

[...]

-- 
Lucas Vieites Fariña [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.asixinformatica.com/users/lucas/
Blog: http://www.asixinformatica.com/blog/

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Translation status pages

2005-10-08 Thread Carlos Perelló Marín
On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 19:57 +0200, Christian Rose wrote:
 ons 2005-10-05 klockan 10:44 +0200 skrev Carlos Perelló Marín:
If you'd prefer not to host it on your own server, and if there is
willing to maintain it, I expect some space could possibly be arranged
on one of the real gnome.org servers. It's just easier for the GNOME
sysadmins to set up a DNS entry than it is to set up new user accounts
and a secure/capable hosting area etc. It would probably get rolling
quicker if hosted externally, at least to begin with ;)
   
   I agree with Ross; an external solution is probably the best in the
   short run, but in the long run, GNOME translation status pages and the
   translation status page scripts make sense to have hosted on the
   gnome.org servers. That will make sure that:
   
   * There are always several people distributed around the world who can
   access the machine and fix it if needed (gnome.org sysadmins)
   * The pipe is already a *very* Fat (tm) one
   * The status pages will not be inaccessible again when some single
   individual moves/goes on vacation/loses his job/gets hit by a bus and is
   unable to maintain them
   * The translation status pages will have access to the repository which
   sits right next to it at the very same location
   
   The only thing needed for the translation status pages to be hosted at
   the real, live gnome.org servers is for someone to figure out what kind
   of CPU/memory/disk resources it needs, and is prepared to help set it
   up, or at least give sufficient instructions for having it set up.
   
   So what's the required configuration?
  
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/srv/l10n # du -hs .
  6.9G.
  
  and the process takes near 4 hours with an AMD Sempron(tm)   2800+ and
  768MB of RAM
  
  With more RAM and faster CPU the process should be also faster. The main
  problem here is the hard disk I/O that's why we had to move it outside
  widget the first time, the server load was really high.
 
 widget has since then been replaced by window. window.gnome.org is a
 dual Xeon 2.8 GHz server with 2 GB memory and RAID1 SCSI disks.
 
 This should be doable, right?

Sure, the server works, the problem are the other process on that
machine not the generation of the status pages... I'm not able to tell
you if that machine will work or not, sorry.

 
 
  As I said in other email, I don't mind to give shell access to you
  (Christian), danilo or any GNOME admin to have a backup
 
 Still, I think the Translation Status pages are too important to be
 hosted off-site. The work of the GTP effectively stops completely when
 the status pages are not working.

Just to make it crystal clear, I don't have anything against that, I'm
the maintainer, not the owner.

 
 If you are on vacation and the current server hosting the pages goes
 down, we aren't helped much by shell accounts. Sure, we can probably
 call someone, but whom? And how fast can it be fixed?

My current hosting allows to control it over the web and reboot a
recovery Linux system just in case is there any problem with the server
so if finally we don't move it outside my server and offline problems
became a problem (the stability of the server changed a lot since 6
months ago...) I could share that web access too with any GNOME sysadmin
(it's better if I know him)

 
 With the gnome.org servers, emergency plans for all of that are already
 in place, and have been proven to be working. But having the translation
 status pages hosted somewhere completely else where I and others don't
 have any information of that sort doesn't make me sleep well at night.

If the migration to GNOME server is doable, perfect, if it's not, I
don't mind to get a plan in place so you can sleep well...


Cheers.

 
 
 Christian
 
-- 
Carlos Perelló Marín
Ubuntu Hoary (PowerPC)  = http://www.ubuntulinux.org
Linux Registered User #121232
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] || mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://carlos.pemas.net
Valencia - Spain


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n


Re: Translation status pages

2005-10-08 Thread Ross Golder
On ศ., 2005-10-07 at 20:42 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
 On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 20:12 +0200, Danilo Šegan wrote:
 
- If it really is that intensive, it's not optimizable, we need it on a
  gnome.org server, than container is probably the most appropriate
  home:
  
   window: 2 gig ram, 72gig (raid 1) disk, load avg ~1 
   container: 6 gig ram, 500gig (raid 5) disk, load avg ~0.2
  
  Any machine with sufficient CPU power and low load will do.  But, some
  amount of disk-bound work is still necessary, because we are anyway
  talking about working with/parsing full CVS code to find extractable
  strings, and then working on each PO file in turn.
 
 Basically, GNOME doesn't have a spare machine - all 4 of ours servers
 perform important roles in public services.

A dedicated i18n machine wouldn't be such a bad request, seeing as the
translation pages service seems to be held in a very high regard amongst
the GTP team.

I vaguely recall some big company asking us what server hardware we
needed for GNOME project use (on the sysadmin list I think). I don't
recall seeing a response or followup. Does else anyone remember? Does
anyone know the outcome?

--
Ross

___
gnome-i18n mailing list
gnome-i18n@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n