From tom at infoether.com  Sat Sep 24 21:12:47 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:12:47 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] New mirror - Scott Braynard at HostingZero
Message-ID: <1127610767.27092.79.camel@hal>

Hi all -

Just a heads up that now there are four mirrors in the rotation - Scott
Braynard has set up a new mirror at HostingZero to help share the load.
Thanks Scott!

By the way, does anyone have an estimate of how much they've been
serving per month?  I've been thinking that we totalled 200 GB per
month, but maybe we're over that now?

Yours,

Tom


From halostatue at gmail.com  Sun Sep 25 00:52:27 2005
From: halostatue at gmail.com (Austin Ziegler)
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 00:52:27 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] New mirror - Scott Braynard at HostingZero
In-Reply-To: <1127610767.27092.79.camel@hal>
References: <1127610767.27092.79.camel@hal>
Message-ID: <9e7db9110509242152368d8f2e@mail.gmail.com>

On 9/24/05, Tom Copeland <tom at infoether.com> wrote:
> Just a heads up that now there are four mirrors in the rotation -
> Scott Braynard has set up a new mirror at HostingZero to help share
> the load. Thanks Scott!
>
> By the way, does anyone have an estimate of how much they've been
> serving per month? I've been thinking that we totalled 200 GB per
> month, but maybe we're over that now?

Well, I'm a bit shocked, actually... these are Mb served from the
billing date.

    09/09/2005     2,705.00
    09/10/2005     2,062.00
    09/11/2005     1,943.00
    09/12/2005     2,886.00
    09/13/2005     3,063.00
    09/14/2005     5,734.00
    09/15/2005     3,095.00
    09/16/2005     2,945.00
    09/17/2005     1,975.00
    09/18/2005     1,868.00
    09/19/2005     2,520.00
    09/20/2005     2,904.00
    09/21/2005     3,639.00
    09/22/2005     2,501.00
    09/23/2005     2,365.00
    Total         42,205.00

For the month of September, I've served 3,650 copies of ruby182-15.exe.
Nothing else is comparable in size. For the year to date, it's not much
different: 25,712 copies of ruby182-14.exe, 17,885 copies of
ruby182-15.exe, and 1,062 copies of ruby-1.8.2.tar.gz. The top *thirty*
requests on this account are for RubyForge files for the last nine
months. There have been 71,916 copies of ruby182-15.exe served, so I
have served about 25% of them; over the last month, 15,386
ruby182-1[45].exe have been served and my share -- just based on the
served ruby182-15.exe copies -- is about 23%.

After the second mirror was added in February, my bandwidth usage
dropped from 95Gb (68,735 requests, 1.38Mb per request) to 51 Gb (65,085
requests, 0.78Mb per request). It climbed through April to about 48Gb
(163,840 requests, 0.30Mb per request) and dropped in May -- I'm
presuming with the addition of the third mirror -- to 40Gb (255,990
requests, 0.15Mb per request). It has, however, steadily climbed again
so that there were 68Gb served in August and 61Gb served so far in
September (310,531 requests, 0.22Mb per request in August; 273,305
requests, 0.22Mb per request *so far* in September).

I don't expect to see a drop again in bandwidth until the October
timeframe, now that the fourth mirror has been added.

If others are experiencing similar to me, we're busting 200Mb served
monthly and have been since July or August. Tom, I'd suggest that
RubyForge will want to find a fifth mirror around January.

-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue at gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin at halostatue.ca


From tom at infoether.com  Mon Sep 26 09:22:33 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 09:22:33 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] New mirror - Scott Braynard at HostingZero
In-Reply-To: <9e7db9110509242152368d8f2e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1127610767.27092.79.camel@hal>
	<9e7db9110509242152368d8f2e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1127740953.27092.131.camel@hal>

On Sun, 2005-09-25 at 00:52 -0400, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On 9/24/05, Tom Copeland <tom at infoether.com> wrote:
> > By the way, does anyone have an estimate of how much they've been
> > serving per month? I've been thinking that we totalled 200 GB per
> > month, but maybe we're over that now?
> 
> It has, however, steadily climbed again
> so that there were 68Gb served in August and 61Gb served so far in
> September 

Thanks for the info!  OK, so sounds like it was heading for 70-75GB each
with 3 mirrors, so perhaps 225 GB per month nowadays.  Whew!

Happily, now that Robby has signed up to be the fifth mirror, that
reduces things to about 45-50 GB per mirror.

Yours,

tom



From tom at infoether.com  Mon Sep 26 09:32:07 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 09:32:07 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Sharing the load
Message-ID: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>

Hi all -

Right now everyone is sharing the load equally - I just do a rand() and
if it's > 80, choose Austin, else if > 60, choose Robby, etc.  This
makes it easy to calculate overall bandwidth usage by taking anyone's
numbers and multiplying by # of mirrors.

But, just in case, does anyone have a lot of extra bandwidth to spare
and would like to shoulder more of the load - i.e., more than 20%?   If
so, please let me know and I'll adjust the load allocations...

Thanks,

Tom


From dennis at lauschmusik.de  Mon Sep 26 09:42:02 2005
From: dennis at lauschmusik.de (Dennis Oelkers)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:42:02 +0200
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Sharing the load
In-Reply-To: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>
References: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>
Message-ID: <711B4FC0-5F83-446E-92F9-C9E0BE0CDEB3@lauschmusik.de>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hey Tom,

Am 26.09.2005 um 15:32 schrieb Tom Copeland:

> But, just in case, does anyone have a lot of extra bandwidth to spare
> and would like to shoulder more of the load - i.e., more than  
> 20%?   If
> so, please let me know and I'll adjust the load allocations...

We (rubyforge.lauschmusik.de) have lots of bandwidth to spare. Our  
mirror
has pushed ~72GB this month, and could push up to 500GB every month.

Kind regards,
                 Dennis Oelkers
- -- 
lm:streaming solutions | levetzowstrasse 10a | 10555 berlin
ceo: bjoern wolf | dennis oelkers
telephone: +49-30-22430275 | mail: info at lauschmusik.de



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFDN/qxcT9mJF158yMRAp4FAKDSDPqe2Kdj46bEmvWX2aqEYM10iwCgy7QS
qzSwjhG4siczdQHspy4Pzz8=
=NJSK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From tom at infoether.com  Mon Sep 26 09:53:10 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 09:53:10 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Sharing the load
In-Reply-To: <711B4FC0-5F83-446E-92F9-C9E0BE0CDEB3@lauschmusik.de>
References: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>
	<711B4FC0-5F83-446E-92F9-C9E0BE0CDEB3@lauschmusik.de>
Message-ID: <1127742790.27092.151.camel@hal>

On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 15:42 +0200, Dennis Oelkers wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hey Tom,
> 
> Am 26.09.2005 um 15:32 schrieb Tom Copeland:
> 
> > But, just in case, does anyone have a lot of extra bandwidth to spare
> > and would like to shoulder more of the load - i.e., more than  
> > 20%?   If
> > so, please let me know and I'll adjust the load allocations...
> 
> We (rubyforge.lauschmusik.de) have lots of bandwidth to spare. Our  
> mirror
> has pushed ~72GB this month, and could push up to 500GB every month.

Great scott!  

Well, in that case I shall increase your share of the load from 20% to,
say, 50%?  That will still only be 125 GB per month for, and will
greatly lighten the load on everyone else... many thanks indeed!

Yours,

Tom



From dennis at lauschmusik.de  Mon Sep 26 09:57:21 2005
From: dennis at lauschmusik.de (Dennis Oelkers)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 15:57:21 +0200
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Sharing the load
In-Reply-To: <1127742790.27092.151.camel@hal>
References: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>
	<711B4FC0-5F83-446E-92F9-C9E0BE0CDEB3@lauschmusik.de>
	<1127742790.27092.151.camel@hal>
Message-ID: <70A0B0AC-3AEF-427C-944D-EA98ABE37B5C@lauschmusik.de>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am 26.09.2005 um 15:53 schrieb Tom Copeland:

> Great scott!
>
> Well, in that case I shall increase your share of the load from 20%  
> to,
> say, 50%?  That will still only be 125 GB per month for, and will
> greatly lighten the load on everyone else... many thanks indeed!

Should be no problem, feel free to do so! :)

Kind regards,
             Dennis Oelkers
- -- 
lm:streaming solutions | levetzowstrasse 10a | 10555 berlin
ceo: bjoern wolf | dennis oelkers
telephone: +49-30-22430275 | mail: info at lauschmusik.de



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFDN/5UcT9mJF158yMRAmUUAJ9qvQA9kBGJ3wslDGq6NK/IU9SSXACeMAuo
5gOpGyJ7ofH02UirPPZbru0=
=L4/v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From tom at infoether.com  Mon Sep 26 10:07:48 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 10:07:48 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Sharing the load
In-Reply-To: <70A0B0AC-3AEF-427C-944D-EA98ABE37B5C@lauschmusik.de>
References: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>
	<711B4FC0-5F83-446E-92F9-C9E0BE0CDEB3@lauschmusik.de>
	<1127742790.27092.151.camel@hal>
	<70A0B0AC-3AEF-427C-944D-EA98ABE37B5C@lauschmusik.de>
Message-ID: <1127743668.27092.160.camel@hal>

On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 15:57 +0200, Dennis Oelkers wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Am 26.09.2005 um 15:53 schrieb Tom Copeland:
> 
> > Great scott!
> >
> > Well, in that case I shall increase your share of the load from 20%  
> > to,
> > say, 50%?  That will still only be 125 GB per month for, and will
> > greatly lighten the load on everyone else... many thanks indeed!
> 
> Should be no problem, feel free to do so! :)

Great, I've done so... and the bulk of the load is shifting to you:

Sep 26 09:50:00 rubyforge httpd: RubyForge redirecting ruby182-15.exe to
Location: http://rubyforge.lauschmusik.de/rubyinstaller/ruby182-15.exe
Sep 26 09:51:47 rubyforge httpd: RubyForge redirecting ruby182-15.exe to
Location: http://rubyforge.hostingzero.com/rubyinstaller/ruby182-15.exe
Sep 26 09:53:08 rubyforge httpd: RubyForge redirecting ruby182-15.exe to
Location: http://rubyforge.lauschmusik.de/rubyinstaller/ruby182-15.exe
Sep 26 09:54:51 rubyforge httpd: RubyForge redirecting ruby-1.8.3.tar.gz
to Location: http://rubyforge.planetargon.com/ruby/ruby-1.8.3.tar.gz
Sep 26 09:55:10 rubyforge httpd: RubyForge redirecting ruby182-15.exe to
Location: http://rubyforge.lauschmusik.de/rubyinstaller/ruby182-15.exe
Sep 26 09:56:10 rubyforge httpd: RubyForge redirecting ruby182-15.exe to
Location: http://rubyforge.lauschmusik.de/rubyinstaller/ruby182-15.exe

Thanks again!

Yours,

tom



From robby.lists at planetargon.com  Mon Sep 26 10:15:45 2005
From: robby.lists at planetargon.com (Robby Russell)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 07:15:45 -0700
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Sharing the load
In-Reply-To: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>
References: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal>
Message-ID: <1127744145.7030.43.camel@linus>

On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 09:32 -0400, Tom Copeland wrote:
> Hi all -
> 
> Right now everyone is sharing the load equally - I just do a rand() and
> if it's > 80, choose Austin, else if > 60, choose Robby, etc.  This
> makes it easy to calculate overall bandwidth usage by taking anyone's
> numbers and multiplying by # of mirrors.
> 
> But, just in case, does anyone have a lot of extra bandwidth to spare
> and would like to shoulder more of the load - i.e., more than 20%?   If
> so, please let me know and I'll adjust the load allocations...
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tom

We can be very accomodating. If you're thinking ~40-50GB/mo, we can
likely handle 2-3x that without any problems. 

-Robby

-- 
/******************************************************
* Robby Russell, Owner.Developer.Geek
* PLANET ARGON, Open Source Solutions & Web Hosting
* Portland, Oregon | p: 503.351.4730 | f: 815.642.4068
* www.planetargon.com | www.robbyonrails.com
*******************************************************/


From tom at infoether.com  Mon Sep 26 17:41:28 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 17:41:28 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Sharing the load
In-Reply-To: <1127744145.7030.43.camel@linus>
References: <1127741527.27092.141.camel@hal> <1127744145.7030.43.camel@linus>
Message-ID: <1127770888.5581.7.camel@hal>

On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 07:15 -0700, Robby Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 09:32 -0400, Tom Copeland wrote:
> > Hi all -
> > 
> > Right now everyone is sharing the load equally - I just do a rand() and
> > if it's > 80, choose Austin, else if > 60, choose Robby, etc.  This
> > makes it easy to calculate overall bandwidth usage by taking anyone's
> > numbers and multiplying by # of mirrors.
> > 
> > But, just in case, does anyone have a lot of extra bandwidth to spare
> > and would like to shoulder more of the load - i.e., more than 20%?   If
> > so, please let me know and I'll adjust the load allocations...
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Tom
> 
> We can be very accomodating. If you're thinking ~40-50GB/mo, we can
> likely handle 2-3x that without any problems. 

Cool, thanks!  I think we're OK now that Dennis is handling half the
load... that should keep us for a while.  But thanks!

Yours,

tom



From tom at infoether.com  Tue Sep 27 12:53:33 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 12:53:33 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Lower file size threshold for mirroring?
Message-ID: <1127840013.10296.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Hi all -

Now that we're mirror-flush, I'd like to lower the minimum size for
mirroring - so that files that are larger than 500 KB would be mirrored
out.  Right now the threshold is 1 MB.  This change would get some
popular files served by the mirrors, including some narf releases,
net-ssh releases, allinoneruby, wtr, and various others.  

This would mean an extra 151 MB of files would get replicated out to
your servers, and the bandwidth usage would increase by some amount
(hard to say how much).  If it turned out to be a problem, we could
either increase the threshold again or I could contact some of the folks
that have been volunteering to mirror and taken them up on their offers.

Any objections?

Thanks,

Tom


From evanwebb at gmail.com  Tue Sep 27 13:08:16 2005
From: evanwebb at gmail.com (Evan Webb)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 10:08:16 -0700
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Lower file size threshold for mirroring?
In-Reply-To: <1127840013.10296.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1127840013.10296.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <92f5f81d05092710085283a955@mail.gmail.com>

I'm fine with that. Btw, any news on gem mirroring?

- Evan


On 9/27/05, Tom Copeland <tom at infoether.com> wrote:
> Hi all -
>
> Now that we're mirror-flush, I'd like to lower the minimum size for
> mirroring - so that files that are larger than 500 KB would be mirrored
> out.  Right now the threshold is 1 MB.  This change would get some
> popular files served by the mirrors, including some narf releases,
> net-ssh releases, allinoneruby, wtr, and various others.
>
> This would mean an extra 151 MB of files would get replicated out to
> your servers, and the bandwidth usage would increase by some amount
> (hard to say how much).  If it turned out to be a problem, we could
> either increase the threshold again or I could contact some of the folks
> that have been volunteering to mirror and taken them up on their offers.
>
> Any objections?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom
>
> _______________________________________________
> Support-mirrors mailing list
> Support-mirrors at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/support-mirrors
>


--
When I do good, I feel good;  when I do bad, I feel bad,
and that is my religion.
    -- Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)


From tom at infoether.com  Tue Sep 27 13:13:59 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:13:59 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Lower file size threshold for mirroring?
In-Reply-To: <92f5f81d05092710085283a955@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1127840013.10296.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<92f5f81d05092710085283a955@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1127841239.10296.30.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 10:08 -0700, Evan Webb wrote:
> I'm fine with that. Btw, any news on gem mirroring?

Nope, I just asked Rich about it, nothing new...

Yours,

Tom



From tom at infoether.com  Tue Sep 27 13:45:05 2005
From: tom at infoether.com (Tom Copeland)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:45:05 -0400
Subject: [Support-mirrors] Lower file size threshold for mirroring?
In-Reply-To: <1127843068.10296.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1127840013.10296.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<1127842927.14742.24.camel@linus>
	<1127843068.10296.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <1127843106.10296.37.camel@localhost.localdomain>

> On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 10:42 -0700, Robby Russell wrote:
> > > Now that we're mirror-flush, I'd like to lower the minimum size for
> > > mirroring - so that files that are larger than 500 KB would be mirrored
> > > out.  Right now the threshold is 1 MB.  This change would get some
> > > popular files served by the mirrors, including some narf releases,
> > > net-ssh releases, allinoneruby, wtr, and various others.  
> > > 
> > > This would mean an extra 151 MB of files would get replicated out to
> > > your servers, and the bandwidth usage would increase by some amount
> > > (hard to say how much).  If it turned out to be a problem, we could
> > > either increase the threshold again or I could contact some of the folks
> > > that have been volunteering to mirror and taken them up on their offers.
> > > 
> > > Any objections?
> > > 
> > Nope!
> 

Super!  I'll lower the threshold this evening, probably, so as to do the
file transfers during an off-peak time.

Thanks all,

Tom