[Mageia-sysadm] questions about our infrastructure setup & costs

[Michael Scherer]

Le lundi 02 avril 2012 à 22:12 +0200, Buchan Milne a écrit :
> On Monday, 2 April 2012 16:59:59 Michael Scherer wrote:
> > Le lundi 02 avril 2012 à 15:23 +0200, Romain d'Alverny a écrit :

> > >  2) have a quick report, automatic
> > > 
> > > about this (not only for sysadmin, but for all users of our
> > > infrastructure).
> > 
> > I do think for me that the current report of xymon are sufficient.
> 
> There is some room for enhancements, but that requires a bit more knowledge 
> regarding real (physical) dependencies than I have at present.
> 
> I can maybe add some examples which don't require that knowledge, so others 
> can add some more.

Yes, do not hesitate.


> > And of course, most of them have metered network connections that would
> > maybe not be suitable for something like valstar, who act as a primary
> > mirror. For reference, since we have started the server :
> > 
> > RX bytes:453228974131 (422.1 GiB)
> > TX bytes:9311461347504 (8.4 TiB)
> > 
> > Uptime is 60 days.
> > That's around 4 T per month of transfert.
> 
> How much of this is internal to the hosting provider?

I have no idea. That's hard to say because on one hand, valstar serve as
mirror for builder, so there is lots of traffic. on the other hand, we
act as main mirror ( so traffic is duplicated 3/4 ), so every new rpms
and iso would be sent too.
As well as every tarball upload and download, from builder and from
packagers.

Since RX would be "isos from rabbit + rpms build from jonund/ecosse +
tarball sent from packager", and TX is "isos sent to mirrors + rpms to
mirrors + chroot installation", I cannot give any realistic estimation.

> [...]
> A)That we should be able to know when our network connection is down?
> 
> IMHO, the hosting provider should be monitoring this (our data center business 
> does this for all managed hosting customers). If the hosting provider is not 
> able to do that, then our options are:
> 1)Monitor servers in one location from servers in another, and ensure that 
> they can inform us without requiring the servers in the first location to be 
> available
> 2)Monitor the network interfaces etc. from inside the network, but have a non-
> network notification system, such as SMS modem, or old cell-phone (Nokia 5110 
> was the usual choice a few years ago). Alternatively, a 3G dongle for IP-based 
> access could be considered.
> 
> (note that so far, there is minimal cost involved) 

Monitoring is nice, but that's not a end. That doesn't serve much if we
cannot act on it :/

Usually, people see quite fast that everything is down.
-- 
Michael Scherer