RE: Synology High Availability
Thanks Nathan – the responsibility for “third-party” Synology NAS packages is now clearer to me. Richard From: Nathan Hartman Sent: 29 October 2019 15:17 To: Richard Hewitt Cc: users@subversion.apache.org Subject: Re: Synology High Availability On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 8:27 AM Richard Hewitt mailto:rhew...@systems4silicon.com>> wrote: Is the Subversion package for Synology NAS devices compatible with using Synology High Availability (i.e. hosting the Subversion package upon a Synology High Availability cluster)? This is the mailing list for Subversion; however we don't provide the packages for Synology. Actually we don't provide any packages; we provide code, which 3rd parties package to create installable software. I think you would need to contact Synology to ask about this.
Re: Synology High Availability
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 8:27 AM Richard Hewitt wrote: > Is the Subversion package for Synology NAS devices compatible with using > Synology High Availability (i.e. hosting the Subversion package upon a > Synology High Availability cluster)? > This is the mailing list for Subversion; however we don't provide the packages for Synology. Actually we don't provide any packages; we provide code, which 3rd parties package to create installable software. I think you would need to contact Synology to ask about this.
Synology High Availability
Is the Subversion package for Synology NAS devices compatible with using Synology High Availability (i.e. hosting the Subversion package upon a Synology High Availability cluster)?
Re: High availability
ullrich.j...@elektrobit.com wrote on Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 07:19:10 +: > Does anyone here know how other large/high profile sites (e.g. the Apache > foundation) are ensuring availability? I couldn't find any hints at the > website... https://www.apache.org/dev/machines We use raidz2 plus dual SSDs for a 'cache' vdev, and additionally we keep an svnsync mirror on the other side of the ocean. For futher questions feel free to ping on . The amount of data is under 200GB, at last count. > > Cheers, > > Ulli > > -- > Ullrich Jans, Specialist, IT-A > Phone: +49 9131 7701-6627, mailto:ullrich.j...@elektrobit.com > Fax: +49 9131 7701-6333, www.elektrobit.com > > Elektrobit Automotive GmbH, Am Wolfsmantel 46, 91058 Erlangen, Germany > Managing Directors: Alexander Kocher, Gregor Zink Register Court Fürth HRB > 4886 > > > > > > Please note: This e-mail may contain confidential information > intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this > e-mail in error, please do not disclose it to anyone, notify > the sender promptly, and delete the message from your system. > Thank you. >
RE: High availability
Hi Nico, > -Original Message- > From: Nico Kadel-Garcia [mailto:nka...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 10:30 AM > To: Jans Ullrich > Cc: users@subversion.apache.org > Subject: Re: High availability > > Go call WanDisco. They have *precisely* this sort of high availability > setup in their commercial offerings, with consensus based selection of > a Subversion "master" among a set of synchronized distinct Subversion > servers, and I strongly suspect it's a lot more economical to buy > their product than spend your time implementing it from scratch. That's part of the problem: at 1000+ users, their licensing costs tend to become rather high. (At least, last time I checked - currently, I can't seem to find a price list.) I'll call them anyway, but doing my job properly will require me to at least look at the cost of alternatives. Cheers, Ulli Please note: This e-mail may contain confidential information intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this e-mail in error, please do not disclose it to anyone, notify the sender promptly, and delete the message from your system. Thank you.
Re: High availability
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 3:19 AM, wrote: > Hi, > > I'm running a rather large Subversion installation (>1000 repos, >1 TB total > storage, >1000 users). I'm looking for advice how to improve our > availability. We're currently quite good, but I'm a bit worried about e.g. > hardware failure. Performance is not an issue for now (machine load <2, at > about 20 svn-requests per second). > > How are you out there doing it? I have a few ideas, but I'd like to hear the > opinions of others and get maybe some pointers for more research. Go call WanDisco. They have *precisely* this sort of high availability setup in their commercial offerings, with consensus based selection of a Subversion "master" among a set of synchronized distinct Subversion servers, and I strongly suspect it's a lot more economical to buy their product than spend your time implementing it from scratch. > My ideas: > > * use svnsync replication. Drawback: failure needs manual intervention, hook > scripts need to be transferred manually. > * use an active-passive cluster with e.g. heartbeat. That would be possible, > the data reside on a SAN anyway. > * use an active-active cluster with two separate machines sharing the storage > via a cluster fs (GFS? GPFS?) with a HA load balancer in front. Probably the > sexiest solution ;-) > * I already discarded the idea of using active-active with NFS since I can > remember the reports of strange failures... > > Does anyone here know how other large/high profile sites (e.g. the Apache > foundation) are ensuring availability? I couldn't find any hints at the > website... > > Cheers, > > Ulli > > -- > Ullrich Jans, Specialist, IT-A > Phone: +49 9131 7701-6627, mailto:ullrich.j...@elektrobit.com > Fax: +49 9131 7701-6333, www.elektrobit.com > > Elektrobit Automotive GmbH, Am Wolfsmantel 46, 91058 Erlangen, Germany > Managing Directors: Alexander Kocher, Gregor Zink Register Court Fürth HRB > 4886 > > > > > > Please note: This e-mail may contain confidential information > intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this > e-mail in error, please do not disclose it to anyone, notify > the sender promptly, and delete the message from your system. > Thank you. >
High availability
Hi, I'm running a rather large Subversion installation (>1000 repos, >1 TB total storage, >1000 users). I'm looking for advice how to improve our availability. We're currently quite good, but I'm a bit worried about e.g. hardware failure. Performance is not an issue for now (machine load <2, at about 20 svn-requests per second). How are you out there doing it? I have a few ideas, but I'd like to hear the opinions of others and get maybe some pointers for more research. My ideas: * use svnsync replication. Drawback: failure needs manual intervention, hook scripts need to be transferred manually. * use an active-passive cluster with e.g. heartbeat. That would be possible, the data reside on a SAN anyway. * use an active-active cluster with two separate machines sharing the storage via a cluster fs (GFS? GPFS?) with a HA load balancer in front. Probably the sexiest solution ;-) * I already discarded the idea of using active-active with NFS since I can remember the reports of strange failures... Does anyone here know how other large/high profile sites (e.g. the Apache foundation) are ensuring availability? I couldn't find any hints at the website... Cheers, Ulli -- Ullrich Jans, Specialist, IT-A Phone: +49 9131 7701-6627, mailto:ullrich.j...@elektrobit.com Fax: +49 9131 7701-6333, www.elektrobit.com Elektrobit Automotive GmbH, Am Wolfsmantel 46, 91058 Erlangen, Germany Managing Directors: Alexander Kocher, Gregor Zink Register Court Fürth HRB 4886 Please note: This e-mail may contain confidential information intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this e-mail in error, please do not disclose it to anyone, notify the sender promptly, and delete the message from your system. Thank you.
Re: High availability
On Feb 13, 2010, at 11:32, Arsen Shnurkov wrote: > Where one can find an article about HA-setup of subversion I haven't looked for an article specifically, but there are several things you can do to make your Subversion setup more reliable and perform better. You can create read-only mirrors using svnsync; users who need only read access can use one of the mirrors and leave the master repository for committers. Or you can even set up your mirrors to proxy write requests back to the master transparently. If the master should ever fail, there is a short manual process you can perform to turn any of the mirrors into a new master. If by high availability you mean two Subversion servers sitting side by side accessing the same repository data, then my understanding is this is possible as long as your data lives on a cluster filesystem, like RedHat's GFS or Apple's Xsan, to ensure neither server clobbers the other's work.
Re: High availability
Hi Arsen, I help to run a Subversion Community Site for WANdisco ( http://subversion.wandisco.com if you're interested). One of the links that you've mentioned is our High Availability product. Is there any information specifically that you're looking for? If so, please don't hesitate in getting in touch with me and I'll happily get someone to provide you with some further details should you wish me to do so. Let me know. Kind Regards, James Bailey Community Site Engineer WANdisco, Inc. On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Arsen Shnurkov wrote: > Where one can find an article about HA-setup of subversion > (preferable for gentoo)? > > I found two places: > http://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2007-01/1307.shtml > (it just say that someone uses GFS) and > http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/highavailability/ > (It looks like commercial product, I don't read it all yet) > > >
High availability
Where one can find an article about HA-setup of subversion (preferable for gentoo)? I found two places: http://svn.haxx.se/users/archive-2007-01/1307.shtml (it just say that someone uses GFS) and http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/highavailability/ (It looks like commercial product, I don't read it all yet)
