On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 08:33:51 -0600 Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > There's a few things we could do on fas load: > > a) add more fas servers. > b) reduce the number of runs. How often do we change someone in > sysadmin-noc, sysadmin-main, sysadmin-build? > c) move to a system where we only re-run fasClient when there is a > change. I'm thinking for the hosts which are sysadmin-ish only - do C. for the publicish hosts continue to poll fas directly. so: - hosted, people, bastion, publictests == poll - everything else is a set built and pushed to them. > I'd agree collectd off probibly. Or at least a seperate one if we > needed to monitor them. I'm not sure what benefit we get from collectd on transient builders, though. On our long-running hosts I understand but not on the builders. > > Yeah, we could hopefully have another network thats larger than /24 > for the arm builders. I can imagine various network changes should easily allow us to allocate larger than a /24 to the internal build network. > I'm sure some of this will be a process of 'oh no, what we have now > doesn't scale, lets fix it'. Of course some of it we can get ready for > up front too. yay for planning! :) > Overall I like the idea of the automated builder re-install and think > it will get us more ready for things like a large arm cluster. Then I will get crackin' on making it work. -sv
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/infrastructure
