Re: [tahoe-dev] new foolscap version requirement

2011-01-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Okay here is a version that I actually manually tested and that actually works on my machine. I would be satisfied with including this in trunk provided all the buildslaves passed tests with this patch. 1 patch for repository zo...@dev.allmydata.org:/home/darcs/tahoe-lafs/trunk: Thu Jan 6 00:48:

Re: [tahoe-dev] new foolscap version requirement

2011-01-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Brian Warner wrote: > >> -                  "foolscap[secure_connections] >= 0.5.1", >> +                  # foolscap < 0.6 is incompatible with Twisted 10.2.0. >> +                  "foolscap[secure_connections] >= 0.6.0", ... > But for everyone else, this introdu

Re: [tahoe-dev] [tahoe-lafs] #1252: use different encoding parameters for dirnodes than for files

2011-01-05 Thread tahoe-lafs
#1252: use different encoding parameters for dirnodes than for files ---+ Reporter: davidsarah | Owner: davidsarah Type: defect | Status: assigne

Re: [tahoe-dev] Question about one-node network

2011-01-05 Thread David-Sarah Hopwood
On 2011-01-05 08:36, Michael Coppola wrote: > Hi Greg, > > Thanks for your advice. I think I'll just download all my files off the > existing node and start the network from scratch again - this time with > more nodes and a proper configuration. > > Is there a command that can be used to grab al

Re: [tahoe-dev] new foolscap version requirement

2011-01-05 Thread Brian Warner
On 1/5/11 5:15 PM, David-Sarah Hopwood wrote: > > Unfortunately, there is no way that I know of to declare a conditional > dependency on 'foolscap[secure_connections] >= 0.6.0' if the version > of Twisted we are using is 10.2. Yup. I'm just venting :). > 'setup.py build' should download a foolsc

Re: [tahoe-dev] new foolscap version requirement

2011-01-05 Thread David-Sarah Hopwood
On 2011-01-05 18:48, Brian Warner wrote: > >> Author: david-sarah >> Date: Thu Dec 30 22:00:39 2010 -0800 >> >> Update foolscap version requirement to 0.6.0, to address >> http://foolscap.lothar.com/trac/ticket/167 >> >> - "foolscap[secure_connections] >= 0.5.1", >> +

Re: [tahoe-dev] FAQ? - What happens if I loose the Tahoe-LAFS gateway machine? production ready?

2011-01-05 Thread Brian Warner
On 1/5/11 2:26 PM, Carsten Krüger wrote: > >> What matters most is the filecap, dircap, or "rootcap" under which >> you stored your data. You must retain access to that string. > > This is only a small amount of data that never changes? Right. Think of it like a URL that points to a whole site f

Re: [tahoe-dev] [tahoe-lafs] #869: Allow Tahoe filesystem to be run over a different key-value-store / DHT implementation

2011-01-05 Thread tahoe-lafs
#869: Allow Tahoe filesystem to be run over a different key-value-store / DHT implementation -+-- Reporter: davidsarah | Owner: nobody Type: e

Re: [tahoe-dev] FAQ? - What happens if I loose the Tahoe-LAFS gateway machine? production ready?

2011-01-05 Thread Shawn Willden
2011/1/5 Carsten Krüger > Hello Brian, > > > The gateway is merely that: a gateway between your HTTP-speaking client > > and the Tahoe storage grid. Nothing on the gateway needs to be backed-up > > or preserved. > > > What matters most is the filecap, dircap, or "rootcap" under which you > > stor

Re: [tahoe-dev] FAQ? - What happens if I loose the Tahoe-LAFS gateway machine? production ready?

2011-01-05 Thread Carsten Krüger
Hello Brian, > The gateway is merely that: a gateway between your HTTP-speaking client > and the Tahoe storage grid. Nothing on the gateway needs to be backed-up > or preserved. > What matters most is the filecap, dircap, or "rootcap" under which you > stored your data. You must retain access to

Re: [tahoe-dev] FAQ? - What happens if I loose the Tahoe-LAFS gateway machine? production ready?

2011-01-05 Thread Brian Warner
On 1/5/11 12:56 PM, Carsten Krüger wrote: > maybe it's a FAQ but I didn't find an answer on the website. Excellent questions! Yeah, we should definitely add these to the FAQ. > What happens if I loose the gateway? Did the informations on the > storage servers are sufficent to "rebuild" the hole

[tahoe-dev] FAQ? - What happens if I loose the Tahoe-LAFS gateway machine? production ready?

2011-01-05 Thread Carsten Krüger
Hello, maybe it's a FAQ but I didn't find an answer on the website. What happens if I loose the gateway? Did the informations on the storage servers are sufficent to "rebuild" the hole system? Is the index etc. stored in a distributed way? If not: what files of the gateway have to be backuped?

[tahoe-dev] new foolscap version requirement

2011-01-05 Thread Brian Warner
> Author: david-sarah > Date: Thu Dec 30 22:00:39 2010 -0800 > > Update foolscap version requirement to 0.6.0, to address > http://foolscap.lothar.com/trac/ticket/167 > > - "foolscap[secure_connections] >= 0.5.1", > + # foolscap < 0.6 is incompatible

Re: [tahoe-dev] UnhappinessError during renew

2011-01-05 Thread Brian Warner
On 1/5/11 6:26 AM, slush wrote: > Hello, > > after few weeks I checked logs of my storage repairs and found, that > process is permanently throwing UnhappinessError. That means I probably > lost some of my data, right? Is here some way how to fix it / skip error > and let repairer to renew other f

Re: [tahoe-dev] UnhappinessError during renew

2011-01-05 Thread slush
Thank you Francois for info, I will try it and then tell you. Marek On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Francois Deppierraz wrote: > Hi Slush, > > On 01/05/2011 06:15 PM, slush wrote: > > > Zooko, I think I understand the message as is (but yes, the meaning is > > obfuscated a little :). I only care

Re: [tahoe-dev] UnhappinessError during renew

2011-01-05 Thread Francois Deppierraz
Hi Slush, On 01/05/2011 06:15 PM, slush wrote: > Zooko, I think I understand the message as is (but yes, the meaning is > obfuscated a little :). I only care that one failure in renewal process > shut down it completely. Say I have one big file (10GB) and thousands of > small files. When uploadin

Re: [tahoe-dev] UnhappinessError during renew

2011-01-05 Thread slush
Zooko, I think I understand the message as is (but yes, the meaning is obfuscated a little :). I only care that one failure in renewal process shut down it completely. Say I have one big file (10GB) and thousands of small files. When uploading of one big share failed because there is not enough pla

Re: [tahoe-dev] planning Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.2

2011-01-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
following-up to my own post to clarify culturally-specific references... On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote: > Anyone out there who reviews #755 will get a silver star from me! :-) ... > P.S. Let's see... how do you give someone a silver star over the > Internet? A mere ima

Re: [tahoe-dev] planning Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.2

2011-01-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Francois Deppierraz wrote: > > I would love to have ticket #755 reviewed and committed in v1.8.2 > because it is a real show-stopper for running regular deep-check+repair > in a reliable way. Okay. I agree it is an important issue and thanks for the patch to fix it

Re: [tahoe-dev] UnhappinessError during renew

2011-01-05 Thread Zooko O'Whielacronx
Hi, Marek. On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:26 AM, slush wrote: > > after few weeks I checked logs of my storage repairs and found, that process > is permanently throwing UnhappinessError. That means I probably lost some of > my data, right? Is here some way how to fix it / skip error and let repairer >

[tahoe-dev] UnhappinessError during renew

2011-01-05 Thread slush
Hello, after few weeks I checked logs of my storage repairs and found, that process is permanently throwing UnhappinessError. That means I probably lost some of my data, right? Is here some way how to fix it / skip error and let repairer to renew other files of my storage? Thanks, Marek _

Re: [tahoe-dev] uploading unhappiness error messages

2011-01-05 Thread Greg Troxel
Brian Warner writes: > On 1/4/11 9:36 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> >> [show full servers on status page] > > Oh, that's an awesome idea. I'll add that to the accounting > server-status page that I'm building for #666 now. Thanks. If that makes it into 1.8.2 I think it would vastly help the n00b

Re: [tahoe-dev] Accounting, 2010 edition

2011-01-05 Thread Randy Bush
> GPG requires more clicks, more thought, and more administration than > insecure communication. and jumping off a cliff is easier than a long march. i.e. different goals and different results. > The way secure communication should work is that > > 1: a hash of a rule identifying a public key

Re: [tahoe-dev] Accounting, 2010 edition

2011-01-05 Thread James A. Donald
On 2011-01-05 4:06 PM, Randy Bush wrote: we know gpg/pgp is unfashionable. but i got used to being unfashionable many decades ago. so what is in fashion? cleartext email? cleartext files? The problem is not fashion, but architecture and user interface. GPG requires more clicks, more though

Re: [tahoe-dev] planning Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.2

2011-01-05 Thread Francois Deppierraz
Hi Zooko, On 01/04/2011 09:16 PM, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote: > Perhaps once we've finished a few more of these outstanding > review-needed tickets and #1286, we should release Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.2. I would love to have ticket #755 reviewed and committed in v1.8.2 because it is a real show-stopper f

Re: [tahoe-dev] Question about one-node network

2011-01-05 Thread Michael Coppola
Hi Greg, Thanks for your advice. I think I'll just download all my files off the existing node and start the network from scratch again - this time with more nodes and a proper configuration. Is there a command that can be used to grab all the files from a Tahoe-LAFS network? (or least a given d