Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-04 Thread Jay Greguske
On 02/04/2016 03:35 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 02:24:12PM -0800, Hannes Schmidt wrote: >> I'm not asking for the images to be continually supported. Just not >> deleted. Maybe they can be placed into a separate "archive" AWS account? > I don't think there's a way to do

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-04 Thread Hannes Schmidt
Thank you for the PR, Kushal. I will soon merge it. I'm a little confused right now. When my CI build was failing the day before yesterday because it didn't find an AMI for 21, I looked for it manually and didn't find any. I can see ami-15326925 now but it shows a creation date of February 2,

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-04 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 10:29:26PM -0800, Garrett Holmstrom wrote: > That aside, let's be realistic here: storing 3GB of snapshot data > in all ten EC2 regions costs $3.04 per month. Even after accounting > for two architectures and the past few releases' PV-vs-HVM split, I > could host every

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-04 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 11:56:59AM -0800, Hannes Schmidt wrote: > > Which AMI ID are you looking for, in which regions? We had a problem > Fedora 21 for HVM in us-west-2. I can dig up the AMI ID if you'd like. Id' > have to look at our past CI builds. This is how we're searching for them: >

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-04 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 02:24:12PM -0800, Hannes Schmidt wrote: > I'm not asking for the images to be continually supported. Just not > deleted. Maybe they can be placed into a separate "archive" AWS account? I don't think there's a way to do this without changing the AMI id. That's certainly

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 10:37:05AM +0100, Joe Brockmeier wrote: > > So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? > > Makes no sense to me. > It's no longer receiving updates, so that does actually make sense. > Can you describe the use case for an EOL release that might

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Jan Kurik
Hi Hannes, Fedora-21 is now EOL. So, it makes complete sense to me these images are already not available. Regards, Jan On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:19 AM, wrote: > What is the motivation for the eager deletion of the official Fedora VM > images (AMIs) from EC2? The image for 21

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Joe Brockmeier
On 02/03/2016 09:24 AM, Hannes Schmidt wrote: > > So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? > Makes no sense to me. It's no longer receiving updates, so that does actually make sense. Can you describe the use case for an EOL release that might persuade us that we

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
Hi Jan, So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? Makes no sense to me. -- Hannes On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: > Hi Hannes, > > Fedora-21 is now EOL. So, it makes complete sense to me these images > are already not available.

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
I'm not asking for the images to be continually supported. Just not deleted. Maybe they can be placed into a separate "archive" AWS account? On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Matt Micene wrote: > The transparency argument does make sense, but yes then the "stock Fedora > AMI"

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Matt Micene
The transparency argument does make sense, but yes then the "stock Fedora AMI" is dependent on the projects update and lifecycle policy. On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Hannes Schmidt wrote: > We do take images of fully set-up VMs that are used in experiments. But > there is

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Garrett Holmstrom
On 2016-02-03 1:37, Joe Brockmeier wrote: On 02/03/2016 09:24 AM, Hannes Schmidt wrote: So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? Makes no sense to me. It's no longer receiving updates, so that does actually make sense. > Can you describe the use case for an EOL

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Matt Micene
> > big data genomics community where an experiment that can't be verified by > a 2nd party is a bad experiment. Like everywhere in science. VMs are a > great way to provide that reproducibility. Have you looked at AMI snapshots for reproducing experiment environments? Once the baseline

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
Whether something makes sense is subjective. But as to your 2nd point. One word: Reproducibility. I am in the big data genomics community where an experiment that can't be verified by a 2nd party is a bad experiment. Like everywhere in science. VMs are a great way to provide that reproducibility.

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 02:19:19AM -, han...@ucsc.edu wrote: > > What is the motivation for the eager deletion of the official Fedora > > VM images (AMIs) from EC2? The image for 21 is already gone even > >

Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-02 Thread hannes
What is the motivation for the eager deletion of the official Fedora VM images (AMIs) from EC2? The image for 21 is already gone even though it is not even two years old. Ubuntu is keeping the images around much longer. ___ cloud mailing list