MSVC and GCC Windows Buildslaves are back - old ISOs are not

[Colin Finck]

Hi all,

Thanks to Dmitry Chapyshev's generous donation of rare FB-DIMM memory
modules, our Buildserver has enough RAM for the Win7 buildslave VM now.

I've fired it up and while builds are much slower than before, they are
at least being done again!
Note that Doxygen, ISO hosting, and all three buildslaves are on a
single HDD-backed server right now, so don't expect any performance
miracles.
I'm counting on Aleksey here to get us our remaining servers back this
month :)

Unfortunately, our HDDs were also lacking space, so I had to move the
public "bootcd_old" folder from iso.reactos.org to another (private)
place. It contained BootCD ISOs from 2009 to 2012, totalling 421GB.
Any idea how to deal with them in the long run? I can basically think of
4 possibilities:

* We remove ISOs older than 4 years, because nobody would really do
regression-testing with them.

* We buy additional HDDs every year and continue to host them ourselves
just next to the newer ISOs.

* We find a free file hosting service for OSS projects that can cope
with these amounts of data. Not sure SF.net is the right choice here..

* We choose a paid data storage service like Amazon AWS.

As always, comments are very welcome!


- Colin

[Nuno Brito]

Hi Colin,

On our side at triplecheck we are increasing the infrastructure, exactly 
with the intention of filling it up with software. Would happily make 
available 1Tb of long term storage or more as needed to save the old 
ISOs at no cost.

The only nuisance is that we can't give direct access to the storage for 
security reasons (it is cut off from the Internet). Still, it is 
possible to download through a request mechanism that puts the needed 
files on a public server for download.

We are negotiating the infrastructure growth, around the 1st of November 
should be possible to confirm that we can host these files.

Nuno


On 04/10/16 21:10, Colin Finck wrote:
>   Hi all,
>
>  Thanks to Dmitry Chapyshev's generous donation of rare FB-DIMM memory
>  modules, our Buildserver has enough RAM for the Win7 buildslave VM now.
>
>  I've fired it up and while builds are much slower than before, they are
>  at least being done again!
>  Note that Doxygen, ISO hosting, and all three buildslaves are on a
>  single HDD-backed server right now, so don't expect any performance
>  miracles.
>  I'm counting on Aleksey here to get us our remaining servers back this
>  month :)
>
>  Unfortunately, our HDDs were also lacking space, so I had to move the
>  public "bootcd_old" folder from iso.reactos.org to another (private)
>  place. It contained BootCD ISOs from 2009 to 2012, totalling 421GB.
>  Any idea how to deal with them in the long run? I can basically think of
>  4 possibilities:
>
>  * We remove ISOs older than 4 years, because nobody would really do
>  regression-testing with them.
>
>  * We buy additional HDDs every year and continue to host them ourselves
>  just next to the newer ISOs.
>
>  * We find a free file hosting service for OSS projects that can cope
>  with these amounts of data. Not sure SF.net is the right choice here..
>
>  * We choose a paid data storage service like Amazon AWS.
>
>  As always, comments are very welcome!
>
>
>  - Colin
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>  
-- 
Managing Director, TripleCheck GmbH
twitter @nn81 | UK [phone] | DE [phone]
http://triplecheck.net

[Christoph von Wittich]

What about deduplication?

Am 04.10.2016 um 22:10 schrieb Colin Finck:
>   Hi all,
>
>  Thanks to Dmitry Chapyshev's generous donation of rare FB-DIMM memory
>  modules, our Buildserver has enough RAM for the Win7 buildslave VM now.
>
>  I've fired it up and while builds are much slower than before, they are
>  at least being done again!
>  Note that Doxygen, ISO hosting, and all three buildslaves are on a
>  single HDD-backed server right now, so don't expect any performance
>  miracles.
>  I'm counting on Aleksey here to get us our remaining servers back this
>  month :)
>
>  Unfortunately, our HDDs were also lacking space, so I had to move the
>  public "bootcd_old" folder from iso.reactos.org to another (private)
>  place. It contained BootCD ISOs from 2009 to 2012, totalling 421GB.
>  Any idea how to deal with them in the long run? I can basically think of
>  4 possibilities:
>
>  * We remove ISOs older than 4 years, because nobody would really do
>  regression-testing with them.
>
>  * We buy additional HDDs every year and continue to host them ourselves
>  just next to the newer ISOs.
>
>  * We find a free file hosting service for OSS projects that can cope
>  with these amounts of data. Not sure SF.net is the right choice here..
>
>  * We choose a paid data storage service like Amazon AWS.
>
>  As always, comments are very welcome!
>
>
>  - Colin
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Colin Finck]

Am 05.10.2016 um 19:48 schrieb Christoph von Wittich:
>   What about deduplication? 
We would need to test if this yields any good results on our already
compressed data. Even if we extract the currently 7zip-compressed ISOs,
the "reactos.cab" inside the ISOs would still be a compressed file.

What deduplication solution do you suggest anyway? ZFS?


- Colin

[Neo Love]

On 2016-10-05 03.10, Colin Finck wrote:
>   Thanks to Dmitry Chapyshev's generous donation of
> rare FB-DIMM memory
>  modules, our Buildserver has enough RAM for the Win7 buildslave VM now.
>  
(y)

>   Unfortunately, our HDDs were also lacking space, so I
> had to move the
>  public "bootcd_old" folder from iso.reactos.org to another (private)
>  place. It contained BootCD ISOs from 2009 to 2012, totalling 421GB.
>  Any idea how to deal with them in the long run? I can basically think of
>  4 possibilities:
>
>  * We remove ISOs older than 4 years, because nobody would really do
>  regression-testing with them.
>  
A reasonable option, imo.

>   * We buy additional HDDs every year and continue to
> host them ourselves
>  just next to the newer ISOs.
>  
Sounds right to me..  HDDs are not too expensive.
I'm willing to pitch in, despite my decrepit pension.

Speaking of which, maybe we could all pitch in to build a new buildserver?
I built my latest workstation for just over 500 euro.
(Xeon E3 3.1GHz, 16 GB RAM, 2x1 TB HDD)

>   * We find a free file hosting service for OSS projects
> that can cope
>  with these amounts of data. Not sure SF.net is the right choice here..
>
>  * We choose a paid data storage service like Amazon AWS.
>  
Oh god, no.. Amazon is a nightmare security-wise.
It's practically impossible to define reasonable firewall rules for
Amazon clients, since AWS shifts their IP range around all the time.

>   As always, comments are very welcome!
>  
And if fun is permissible..
Someone who likes to tinker could have fun building a CD changer archive :)
Some Al rails, stepper motors, drive belts, servos, a normal BR burner 
drive, and
an Arduino or two to control the mechanics and take commands from the PC.
E.g. pater noster stores don't require too much space.
While it would be slow to fetch old stuff, it would practically never 
run out of storage space.

Best Regards
L.

>  
>
>  - Colin
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>

[Colin Finck]

Am 14.10.2016 um 05:55 schrieb Neo Love:
> >   * We buy
> > additional HDDs every year and continue to host them ourselves
> >  just next to the newer ISOs. 
>  
>  Sounds right to me..  HDDs are not too expensive.
>  I'm willing to pitch in, despite my decrepit pension.
>  
>  Speaking of which, maybe we could all pitch in to build a new buildserver?
>  I built my latest workstation for just over 500 euro.
>  (Xeon E3 3.1GHz, 16 GB RAM, 2x1 TB HDD) 
Having additional servers is not a problem of hardware costs, but of
hosting and logistics.

Our critical services are all hosted on dedicated servers at a decent
hosting provider. These servers handle standard tasks very well. But as
soon as we have special requirements (e.g. lots of RAM, HDD space or
multiple physical servers for VM testing), it is impossible or too
expensive.
Therefore, we also bought some specialized servers. They have always
been hosted in countries where electricity and fast internet connections
are cheap and where we have a project member to take care of them. But
as you can imagine, this can never match the availability of a real
hosting provider.

In the next few days, I'm expecting some more servers to be set up at
our project member's location. If that turns out well, we can think
about getting additional storage for them.
I'm still open for alternative/failover hosting solutions though as this
shouldn't depend on a single location and person.


- Colin

[Neo Love]

On 2016-10-18 01.51, Colin Finck wrote:
>   Am 14.10.2016 um 05:55 schrieb Neo Love:
> > >   * We buy
> > > additional HDDs every year and continue to host them ourselves
> > >  just next to the newer ISOs.
> > >  
> >  Sounds right to me..  HDDs are not too expensive.
> >  I'm willing to pitch in, despite my decrepit pension.
> >  Speaking of which, maybe we could all pitch in to build a new buildserver?
> >  
>  Having additional servers is not a problem of hardware costs, but of
>  hosting and logistics.
>  
Oh.. It sounded like there was a hardware issue, since you didn't have 
enough RAM
and the build server was too slow.  And yes, of course running costs 
will always
dominate over hardware investment (which can be cheap using Asian sources).

>   Our critical services are all hosted on dedicated
> servers at a decent
>  hosting provider. These servers handle standard tasks very well.
>  ...
>  Therefore, we also bought some specialized servers. They have always
>  been hosted in countries where electricity and fast internet connections
>  are cheap and where we have a project member to take care of them.
>  
Yes, web/FTP/mail services &c. can be had quite cheaply these days.
It makes sense to move the bandwidth load for e.g. web off our own machines.
I just thought that all build server(s) and test server(s) were our own
machines due to the special programming requirements they have.

South Korea, Ukraine, and Russia have well developed internet
infrastructure at low/competitive cost (per my research at least).
Hmm.. Guess that's why you pointed sideways at Aleksey :)

>   But as you can imagine, this can never match the
> availability of a real
>  hosting provider.
>  
Availability, yes.. But requirement-wise I doubt a provider like
AWS or Akamai is a feasible way to go (economically).
They would most likely charge an arm and a leg to get all our
special programming on their (virtual) machines, even if
they would be able to manage it (in an agnostic manner).

>   In the next few days, I'm expecting some more
> servers to be set up at
>  our project member's location. If that turns out well, we can think
>  about getting additional storage for them.
>  
Rented machines? Or is someone lending us the use of hardware
(and/or bandwidth) out of the goodness of their hearts? :)

>   I'm still open for alternative/failover hosting
> solutions though as this
>  shouldn't depend on a single location and person.
>  
Thailand, where I live, have a consumer peak speed of 58 Mb/s
(avg ~10), and electricity is fairly cheap; 6-13 US cent/kWh.
(A home 10M/640k ADSL connect like mine is ~16 US $/month.)
If you'd like, I can look into cost and availability for a fixed line or 
fiber.

The idea with a self-built CD changer archive was something I just
came up with since I like to tinker myself, and thought it would be
fun to build.. Never mind ;)

Best Regards
L.

>  
>
>  - Colin
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>