Recent Downtime

Gary · January 22, 2008, 06:35:57 PM

They download as corrupt files.

Dannymh · January 22, 2008, 07:42:45 PM

Quote from: dschwab9 on January 22, 2008, 06:32:18 PM
Are they downloading an appearing as corrupted files or not downloading at all?

They download but the archives are corrupted.

When you try to extract them the archives have bytes missing. Looks like the failure might have corrupted a whole batch of them.
I will list as many as I can find.

So they all download but are missing data.

So far have found 4

Gary · January 22, 2008, 08:31:11 PM

Yes, please do report any you find, to either myself or RunicWarrior. We will then try to get the theme packages back online ASAP.

Dannymh · January 23, 2008, 05:47:31 PM

I will download some more and test them when I get a chance, unfortunately with my recent site upgrade I have let my normal work falter a bit so need to catch up, once I am back on top of things I will test as many as humanly possible

GravuTrad · January 23, 2008, 06:53:20 PM

Quote from: GravuTrad on January 22, 2008, 03:16:42 PM
Quote from: Dannymh on January 22, 2008, 01:41:58 AM
Not sure if anyone has noticed but it seems that the themes files are corrupted, I haven had any succesfful downloads or the ones I have , have had corrupted zip files

It' said in the few first posts of this subject.....

Other question for me:

Which is exactly the system use for smf site servers hosting?

And more the backups...

No more precision about my question?

dschwab9 · January 23, 2008, 07:07:11 PM

We currently have a cluster of 3 machines and will be adding 3 more in the coming weeks. Database and file servers are Intel Core 2 Quad and the web servers are AMD Athlon 64 X2's.

Chriss Cohn · January 26, 2008, 05:56:24 PM

Quote from: dschwab9 on January 23, 2008, 07:07:11 PM
We currently have a cluster of 3 machines and will be adding 3 more in the coming weeks. Database and file servers are Intel Core 2 Quad and the web servers are AMD Athlon 64 X2's.

Well please don't get me wrong, but does that mean if i have a Forum with "just" 125.000+ Members, i really need 6?! Servers to power it?
That would be 1000$ and more per month for "just" 1/10 million users..... I always thought that SMF is consuming very less ressources......

Regards, Christian

Harro · January 26, 2008, 06:07:33 PM

Lots depends on the traffic you have.
Also have to keep in mind of all the extra stuff we have here. Including all the download, mods, themes.
So perhaps it's just 125.000 members, but I'm sure we have a LOT more visitors...

Compuart · January 26, 2008, 06:15:11 PM

Also there are thousands of admins around world opening their SMF admin panel and thereby requesting a check directed to simplemachines.org to see if there are any updates available.

Ol' Wombat · January 26, 2008, 06:23:31 PM

Quote from: dschwab9 on January 19, 2008, 02:02:07 AM
...
1. The thermal management system on the motherboard wasn't properly throttling fan speed, possibly for quit a while. ..

Fairly known issue with a number of motherboards - disable it and all will be well

dschwab9 · January 26, 2008, 06:24:25 PM

How many posts and members are irrelevant. You could have 100,000 members and 10 million posts and operate on one server if those members aren't doing anything. We're currently serving approximately 5 million requests to about 30,000 unique visitors per day.

Smith6612 · January 26, 2008, 06:34:06 PM

Hey, at least be happy that SMF is buying more servers and not overloading servers

GravuTrad · January 26, 2008, 07:00:16 PM

Quote from: dschwab9 on January 23, 2008, 07:07:11 PM
We currently have a cluster of 3 machines and will be adding 3 more in the coming weeks. Database and file servers are Intel Core 2 Quad and the web servers are AMD Athlon 64 X2's.

Mounted how?

dschwab9 · January 26, 2008, 08:33:30 PM

If you mean physically mounted: In a rack

If you're talking about file systems: NFS

GravuTrad · January 26, 2008, 11:19:20 PM

thanks. backup servers too?

dschwab9 · January 27, 2008, 12:35:31 AM

Backups are currently rsync'ed offsite. I'm working on implementing a dedicated fileserver that will have two RAID arrays, so there will be an onsite nightly backup and then a weekly offsite snapshot. The current backup system is a little less than reliable and very short on disk space which is why we had a number of corrupt and missing files after the hardware problems.

VistaX · January 27, 2008, 04:52:22 AM

Nice job on getting it back online!

GravuTrad · January 27, 2008, 09:25:01 AM

Quote from: dschwab9 on January 27, 2008, 12:35:31 AM
Backups are currently rsync'ed offsite. I'm working on implementing a dedicated fileserver that will have two RAID arrays, so there will be an onsite nightly backup and then a weekly offsite snapshot. The current backup system is a little less than reliable and very short on disk space which is why we had a number of corrupt and missing files after the hardware problems.

Thanks for this precision (that's exactly the sense and the why of my question), and thanks for this new backup system which is for me really necessary.

dschwab9 · January 27, 2008, 02:03:00 PM

The biggest problem with backups is you usually don't realize they have problems until you need them

GravuTrad · January 27, 2008, 03:43:58 PM

right.

News:

Recent Downtime