[9fans] sources down?

[9fans] sources down?

[Rudolf Sykora]

Hello

when I try '9fs sources' I get a timeout establishing connection...
(all day today)

I guess it's not my problem, or is it?

Thanks
Ruda

(why does this happen SO OFTEN?)

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[ron minnich]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:

> (why does this happen SO OFTEN?)

warning: complaining about something you get for free is
counter-productive. Unless, of course, you are also offering to help
in some way.

ron

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[erik quanstrom]

> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > (why does this happen SO OFTEN?)
>
> warning: complaining about something you get for free is
> counter-productive. Unless, of course, you are also offering to help
> in some way.
>
> ron

there's web-only access at http://sources.coraid.com.

- erik

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Rudolf Sykora]

>> (why does this happen SO OFTEN?)
>
> warning: complaining about something you get for free is
> counter-productive. Unless, of course, you are also offering to help
> in some way.
>
> ron

well, maybe. Maybe not.

In order I be of any help I need to know why the hell this happens,
first. I know next to nothing about how the whole system of sources
works, still I can help if I know how. But I do not remember anybody
saying: 'hey guys, we have this and this problem that causes the
sources are down every now and then.' Yet we see it happening.

You may think it's a question of money (you mentioned it is for free).
It's not. There are many projects out, totally for free, but reliable.
When I do something it must be reliable, or it's worth criticizing.

Ruda

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[dave.l]

> You may think it's a question of money (you mentioned it is for free).
> It's not. There are many projects out, totally for free, but reliable.
> When I do something it must be reliable, or it's worth criticizing.

Firstly if sources goes down, no-one dies so it's not a big deal.

Secondly, given the choice between "a bit unreliable but very cool"
and "very reliable but totally shit", I know which I will take.

D

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Uriel]

Warning, posting gratuitous obnoxious condescending comments is
counter-productive.

Complaining about things on the other hand, it is helpful, specially
when certain people insist in being in denial of certain problems.

Also note that many people have offered to help, and help is clearly
not welcome.

If you expect people to contribute to Plan 9 on their copious spare
time while they are being treated with this kind of contempt, good
luck to you, you are going to need it.

Thank you

uriel

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 6:51 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> (why does this happen SO OFTEN?)
>
> warning: complaining about something you get for free is
> counter-productive. Unless, of course, you are also offering to help
> in some way.
>
> ron
>
>

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Uriel]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> (why does this happen SO OFTEN?)
>>
>> warning: complaining about something you get for free is
>> counter-productive. Unless, of course, you are also offering to help
>> in some way.
>>
>> ron
>
> well, maybe. Maybe not.
>
> In order I be of any help I need to know why the hell this happens,
> first. I know next to nothing about how the whole system of sources
> works, still I can help if I know how. But I do not remember anybody
> saying: 'hey guys, we have this and this problem that causes the
> sources are down every now and then.' Yet we see it happening.

Don't try to apply logic to this, it doesn't work. Anyone that dears
question how things are done should be treated with contempt, and if
you are not hired by some big organization to work on Plan 9 then your
opinion is worth nothing.

> You may think it's a question of money (you mentioned it is for free).
> It's not. There are many projects out, totally for free, but reliable.
> When I do something it must be reliable, or it's worth criticizing.

Except that Plan 9 clearly wants no users and no developers, so
reliability is to be avoided, or it might attract some interest from
people that might help, and that would be bad.

Peace

uriel

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Eric Van Hensbergen]

Okay Noah, you've been tee'd up.
See how easy that was?

     -Eric

Sent from my iPhone

On May 22, 2009, at 4:05 PM, Uriel <uriel99@gmail.com> wrote:

> Warning, posting gratuitous obnoxious condescending comments is
> counter-productive.
>
> Complaining about things on the other hand, it is helpful, specially
> when certain people insist in being in denial of certain problems.
>
> Also note that many people have offered to help, and help is clearly
> not welcome.
>
> If you expect people to contribute to Plan 9 on their copious spare
> time while they are being treated with this kind of contempt, good
> luck to you, you are going to need it.
>
> Thank you
>
> uriel
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 6:51 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> (why does this happen SO OFTEN?)
>>
>> warning: complaining about something you get for free is
>> counter-productive. Unless, of course, you are also offering to help
>> in some way.
>>
>> ron
>>
>>
>

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Uriel]

Something that is totally unreliable, no matter how cool, is not very useful.

And I think anyone that has limited time, and who wants to get
something done, will pick "very reliable but totally shit" over "very
unreliable but very cool" every single time.

Also there is little reason for Plan 9 servers to be unreliable,
others with very little resources have managed to run public Plan 9
servers in their spare time that have proved to be much more reliable
than sources.

Peace

uriel

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:52 PM,  <dave.l@mac.com> wrote:
>> You may think it's a question of money (you mentioned it is for free).
>> It's not. There are many projects out, totally for free, but reliable.
>> When I do something it must be reliable, or it's worth criticizing.
>
> Firstly if sources goes down, no-one dies so it's not a big deal.
>
> Secondly, given the choice between "a bit unreliable but very cool"
> and "very reliable but totally shit", I know which I will take.
>
> D

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[ron minnich]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:

> In order I be of any help I need to know why the hell this happens,
> first. I know next to nothing about how the whole system of sources
> works, still I can help if I know how. But I do not remember anybody
> saying: 'hey guys, we have this and this problem that causes the
> sources are down every now and then.' Yet we see it happening.


OK, so let's try again. How about this:
instead of blasting a note to the known universe, 99.999% of which
can't do anything about the situation, one could do the following:

send a polite, discreet note to the people who actually run sources,
something like this:
"I would like to offer to help with making sources easily and readily
available to the net. I've noticed that, at times, sources is not
accessible. Is there some way in which I can help, by, e.g.,  running
a replicated server?"

Does this latter approach work? Yes, I have seen it work. It's why we
have an improving USB stack.

Does the former approach fail? Yes. It has driven some important
people from this list. Antisocial behavior has negative consequences.

Whining to the list is just, well,  ... whining to the list. It ends
up looking like an attempt to coerce people by shaming them in a
public situation. It's what my kids used to do when they could not get
their favorite dessert in the store. It doesn't make anyone feel any
better. It's why so many people have Uriel in their kill files.

A quiet offer of help to the maintainers is a lot nicer and more
likely to actually get somewhere.

thanks

ron

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Uriel]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:31 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In order I be of any help I need to know why the hell this happens,
>> first. I know next to nothing about how the whole system of sources
>> works, still I can help if I know how. But I do not remember anybody
>> saying: 'hey guys, we have this and this problem that causes the
>> sources are down every now and then.' Yet we see it happening.
>
>
> OK, so let's try again. How about this:
> instead of blasting a note to the known universe, 99.999% of which
> can't do anything about the situation, one could do the following:
>
> send a polite, discreet note to the people who actually run sources,
> something like this:
> "I would like to offer to help with making sources easily and readily
> available to the net. I've noticed that, at times, sources is not
> accessible. Is there some way in which I can help, by, e.g.,  running
> a replicated server?"
>
> Does this latter approach work? Yes, I have seen it work. It's why we
> have an improving USB stack.

What improving USB stack? Ah, so doing everything in secret is the way
to go? I wonder why don't we just shut down 9fans, open discussion and
collaboration is certainly not something anyone wants here anyway.

>
> Does the former approach fail? Yes. It has driven some important
> people from this list. Antisocial behavior has negative consequences.

The only antisocial behavior here (besides mine, obviously) was your
condescending and insulting answer to somebody that just asked an
honest question, and the insinuation that he wasn't ready to help,
when you just admitted "99.999%" of the people can't do anything about
the situation, in great part because people that want to help are made
to feel they are unwelcome by comments like yours.


> Whining to the list is just, well,  ... whining to the list. It ends
> up looking like an attempt to coerce people by shaming them in a
> public situation. It's what my kids used to do when they could not get
> their favorite dessert in the store. It doesn't make anyone feel any
> better. It's why so many people have Uriel in their kill files.

It makes people aware of a problem that many keep denying and
demeaning. If people can't deal with reality, there are always kill
files, as you point out.

uriel

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Noah Evans]

Uriel here's an honest question, would you stop complaining if you had
your own account on the murray hill version of plan9 will full access
to the venti? You'd also have the freedom to do whatever you want with
it.

Yes or no.

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Uriel <uriel99@gmail.com> wrote:
> Something that is totally unreliable, no matter how cool, is not very useful.
>
> And I think anyone that has limited time, and who wants to get
> something done, will pick "very reliable but totally shit" over "very
> unreliable but very cool" every single time.
>
> Also there is little reason for Plan 9 servers to be unreliable,
> others with very little resources have managed to run public Plan 9
> servers in their spare time that have proved to be much more reliable
> than sources.
>
> Peace
>
> uriel
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:52 PM,  <dave.l@mac.com> wrote:
>>> You may think it's a question of money (you mentioned it is for free).
>>> It's not. There are many projects out, totally for free, but reliable.
>>> When I do something it must be reliable, or it's worth criticizing.
>>
>> Firstly if sources goes down, no-one dies so it's not a big deal.
>>
>> Secondly, given the choice between "a bit unreliable but very cool"
>> and "very reliable but totally shit", I know which I will take.
>>
>> D
>
>

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Eric Van Hensbergen]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Uriel <uriel99@gmail.com> wrote:
> Something that is totally unreliable, no matter how cool, is not very useful.
>
> And I think anyone that has limited time, and who wants to get
> something done, will pick "very reliable but totally shit" over "very
> unreliable but very cool" every single time.
>

While not having direct knowledge of what caused the current outage, I
can say that such outages are rarely caused by Plan 9 or the hardware
on which its running.  You see, right now, the Plan 9 machine room
(and the doom room, and much of the offices/lab space around it) are
being repurposed. There are exactly (I think exactly) two people who
turn the lights back on every time something like this happens, and
they get no accolades from the company for providing this free service
to the community -- in fact, their life would be significantly better
if they just left the lights off.  So please, keep antagonizing them
so that they shut this nice free service down -- you'll make their
lives considerably more simple and they can get back to doing real
work.

As ron said, verifying that sources is down on the list (or IRC or
whatever) and then sending a polite note to geoff and/or jmk to let
them know is fine (since they use this infrastructure as their primary
work environment, these problems often cause them more pain than us).
Anything beyond that is ridiculous.  Also  as Ron said, a far more
constructive approach is mirroring (which many already do), and an
even better idea would be for someone to code up a nice little layer
that directs your sources request to the closest available server.

          -eric

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Latchesar Ionkov]

The reality is that the sources outages rarely cause any _real_
problems. I wasn't able to access it few days ago, and instead of
bothering geoff or jim, I just waited few hours. The server came up
and I got what I needed.

    Lucho

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Uriel <uriel99@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:31 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In order I be of any help I need to know why the hell this happens,
>>> first. I know next to nothing about how the whole system of sources
>>> works, still I can help if I know how. But I do not remember anybody
>>> saying: 'hey guys, we have this and this problem that causes the
>>> sources are down every now and then.' Yet we see it happening.
>>
>>
>> OK, so let's try again. How about this:
>> instead of blasting a note to the known universe, 99.999% of which
>> can't do anything about the situation, one could do the following:
>>
>> send a polite, discreet note to the people who actually run sources,
>> something like this:
>> "I would like to offer to help with making sources easily and readily
>> available to the net. I've noticed that, at times, sources is not
>> accessible. Is there some way in which I can help, by, e.g.,  running
>> a replicated server?"
>>
>> Does this latter approach work? Yes, I have seen it work. It's why we
>> have an improving USB stack.
>
> What improving USB stack? Ah, so doing everything in secret is the way
> to go? I wonder why don't we just shut down 9fans, open discussion and
> collaboration is certainly not something anyone wants here anyway.
>
>>
>> Does the former approach fail? Yes. It has driven some important
>> people from this list. Antisocial behavior has negative consequences.
>
> The only antisocial behavior here (besides mine, obviously) was your
> condescending and insulting answer to somebody that just asked an
> honest question, and the insinuation that he wasn't ready to help,
> when you just admitted "99.999%" of the people can't do anything about
> the situation, in great part because people that want to help are made
> to feel they are unwelcome by comments like yours.
>
>
>> Whining to the list is just, well,  ... whining to the list. It ends
>> up looking like an attempt to coerce people by shaming them in a
>> public situation. It's what my kids used to do when they could not get
>> their favorite dessert in the store. It doesn't make anyone feel any
>> better. It's why so many people have Uriel in their kill files.
>
> It makes people aware of a problem that many keep denying and
> demeaning. If people can't deal with reality, there are always kill
> files, as you point out.
>
> uriel
>
>

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Rudolf Sykora]

> While not having direct knowledge of what caused the current outage, I
> can say that such outages are rarely caused by Plan 9 or the hardware
> on which its running.

Ok. So what caused the other outrages in the recent past?
(I may give at least one other date, on which I even asked the same
question to the list; according to you this situation is very rare,
according to what I have lived through it happens annoyingly often.)

> You see, right now, the Plan 9 machine room
> (and the doom room, and much of the offices/lab space around it) are
> being repurposed. There are exactly (I think exactly) two people who
> turn the lights back on every time something like this happens, and
> they get no accolades from the company for providing this free service
> to the community -- in fact, their life would be significantly better
> if they just left the lights off.  So please, keep antagonizing them
> so that they shut this nice free service down -- you'll make their
> lives considerably more simple and they can get back to doing real
> work.

First, I am grateful, somebody once designed plan 9. It is a well
crafted system.
Second, if the system is to be hosted as it is now, it is a shame.
Make statistics.
I don't care who helps, as long as it doesn't work.


> As ron said, verifying that sources is down on the list (or IRC or
> whatever) and then sending a polite note to geoff and/or jmk to let
> them know is fine (since they use this infrastructure as their primary
> work environment, these problems often cause them more pain than us).

I do not know who takes care of the sources. I do not know even there
is somebody called geoff. Thus writing that we should appeal to him is
a nonsense. Moreover, there is not that many posts here, nobody gets
hurt if one writes 'sources are down' here. If it were true and it all
worked as it should, you wouldn't have here anything, by the way.
Writing to the list also documents that something is wrong. And that's
a good thing.

> Anything beyond that is ridiculous.  Also  as Ron said, a far more
> constructive approach is mirroring (which many already do), and an
> even better idea would be for someone to code up a nice little layer
> that directs your sources request to the closest available server.

So is there a need, suddenly? Isn't it good to discuss it here? What
about saying, hey we need it. Who can do it? I guessed this mailing
list IS the right place.

I am a physicist. I can recognize I like the system in a way. I can't
do much about it yet. It's enough for me, that I must struggle with
topics like: I need python, there seem too many of them somehow, how
should I install it, which one? what is necessary?, why hasn't
somebody write a few lines about it?, oh I can't use ssh2, oh probably
usb won't work, oh, let's forget about wireless... Encountering
problems even when downloading sources is just getting to the breaking
point to say: that's enough, let's just stick to something that has
some problems, but works somehow (bsd, linux, whatever...; or
plan9port, glendix). And that's a pity, because although one knows he
would like to follow some way, he is forced to follow a different one.

R

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Eric Van Hensbergen]

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:
>> While not having direct knowledge of what caused the current outage, I
>> can say that such outages are rarely caused by Plan 9 or the hardware
>> on which its running.
>
> Ok. So what caused the other outrages in the recent past?
> (I may give at least one other date, on which I even asked the same
> question to the list; according to you this situation is very rare,
> according to what I have lived through it happens annoyingly often.)
>

Again, I'm not there, but to give a bit of insight, they have been in
the process of tearing up the machine room and moving the lab around.
This means unplugging and moving equipment, moving network equipment,
and so forth.   The external link to the labs is a "special case" link
which means it probably isn't managed with the rest of the enterprise
network.  The sources resource is a (probably relatively expensive)
"public service", which has to be argued for and justified with a
larger company that could care less and has been in financial crisis
since I left several years ago.  It has two people that look after it,
who have real jobs outside of caring for the "public service", and
they have real lives too.  So there is no 24/7 support staff, and the
environment surrounding these machines is currently in major flux.

>> As ron said, verifying that sources is down on the list (or IRC or
>> whatever) and then sending a polite note to geoff and/or jmk to let
>> them know is fine (since they use this infrastructure as their primary
>> work environment, these problems often cause them more pain than us).
>
> I do not know who takes care of the sources. I do not know even there
> is somebody called geoff. Thus writing that we should appeal to him is
> a nonsense. Moreover, there is not that many posts here, nobody gets
> hurt if one writes 'sources are down' here. If it were true and it all
> worked as it should, you wouldn't have here anything, by the way.
> Writing to the list also documents that something is wrong. And that's
> a good thing.
>

As I said, confirming that sources is down on the list is fine.
Asking who to contact when this happens is fine.  AFAIK, Geoff and jmk
read the list and so posting that you are having trouble reaching
sources is sufficient.  Posting antagonizing commentary:

>>>>I guess it's not my problem, or is it?
>>>>(why does this happen SO OFTEN?)

is not productive, it just alienates those who have put their careers
at risk to support the community.

>> Anything beyond that is ridiculous.  Also  as Ron said, a far more
>> constructive approach is mirroring (which many already do), and an
>> even better idea would be for someone to code up a nice little layer
>> that directs your sources request to the closest available server.
>
> So is there a need, suddenly? Isn't it good to discuss it here? What
> about saying, hey we need it. Who can do it? I guessed this mailing
> list IS the right place.
>

The point being made is that if you see a need, please do it.  Post
the solution.  That's productive.  If you are not sure how to do it,
ask for pointers.  If you are unable to provide a solution, ask if
there are mirrors.  Asking for someone else to solve the problem for
you is not productive.  There is no one paid to solve problems for the
community, we are all volunteers as far as that is concerned.  The
population of the labs has been reduced dramatically.  We, as a
community, need to step up and be self-sufficient, or die.

        -eric

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Francisco J Ballesteros]

sources.lsub.org is avaiable just by using 9fs.
But it's probably better to wait for the real thing.

There are also several other mirrors IIRC that have been posted to this list.


On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Rudolf Sykora <rudolf.sykora@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> While not having direct knowledge of what caused the current outage, I
>>> can say that such outages are rarely caused by Plan 9 or the hardware
>>> on which its running.
>>
>> Ok. So what caused the other outrages in the recent past?
>> (I may give at least one other date, on which I even asked the same
>> question to the list; according to you this situation is very rare,
>> according to what I have lived through it happens annoyingly often.)
>>
>
> Again, I'm not there, but to give a bit of insight, they have been in
> the process of tearing up the machine room and moving the lab around.
> This means unplugging and moving equipment, moving network equipment,
> and so forth.   The external link to the labs is a "special case" link
> which means it probably isn't managed with the rest of the enterprise
> network.  The sources resource is a (probably relatively expensive)
> "public service", which has to be argued for and justified with a
> larger company that could care less and has been in financial crisis
> since I left several years ago.  It has two people that look after it,
> who have real jobs outside of caring for the "public service", and
> they have real lives too.  So there is no 24/7 support staff, and the
> environment surrounding these machines is currently in major flux.
>
>>> As ron said, verifying that sources is down on the list (or IRC or
>>> whatever) and then sending a polite note to geoff and/or jmk to let
>>> them know is fine (since they use this infrastructure as their primary
>>> work environment, these problems often cause them more pain than us).
>>
>> I do not know who takes care of the sources. I do not know even there
>> is somebody called geoff. Thus writing that we should appeal to him is
>> a nonsense. Moreover, there is not that many posts here, nobody gets
>> hurt if one writes 'sources are down' here. If it were true and it all
>> worked as it should, you wouldn't have here anything, by the way.
>> Writing to the list also documents that something is wrong. And that's
>> a good thing.
>>
>
> As I said, confirming that sources is down on the list is fine.
> Asking who to contact when this happens is fine.  AFAIK, Geoff and jmk
> read the list and so posting that you are having trouble reaching
> sources is sufficient.  Posting antagonizing commentary:
>
>>>>>I guess it's not my problem, or is it?
>>>>>(why does this happen SO OFTEN?)
>
> is not productive, it just alienates those who have put their careers
> at risk to support the community.
>
>>> Anything beyond that is ridiculous.  Also  as Ron said, a far more
>>> constructive approach is mirroring (which many already do), and an
>>> even better idea would be for someone to code up a nice little layer
>>> that directs your sources request to the closest available server.
>>
>> So is there a need, suddenly? Isn't it good to discuss it here? What
>> about saying, hey we need it. Who can do it? I guessed this mailing
>> list IS the right place.
>>
>
> The point being made is that if you see a need, please do it.  Post
> the solution.  That's productive.  If you are not sure how to do it,
> ask for pointers.  If you are unable to provide a solution, ask if
> there are mirrors.  Asking for someone else to solve the problem for
> you is not productive.  There is no one paid to solve problems for the
> community, we are all volunteers as far as that is concerned.  The
> population of the labs has been reduced dramatically.  We, as a
> community, need to step up and be self-sufficient, or die.
>
>        -eric
>
>

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Anant Narayanan]

On 23-May-09, at 1:54 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote:
> sources.lsub.org is avaiable just by using 9fs.
> But it's probably better to wait for the real thing.
>
> There are also several other mirrors IIRC that have been posted to
> this list.

% 9fs kix.in /n/sources

--
Anant

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Skip Tavakkolian]

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.plan9/browse_thread/thread/7cda8e292be895a5/ec8ea0a9abbc8a69?lnk=gst&q=rob+pike+weekend#ec8ea0a9abbc8a69

well, maybe not so quiet.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[J.R. Mauro]

There are plenty of mirrors, I'm pretty sure the "sources is down
AGAIN" comments could be mitigated by people improving their 9fs
scripts.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[ron minnich]

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 4:59 PM, J.R. Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
> There are plenty of mirrors, I'm pretty sure the "sources is down
> AGAIN" comments could be mitigated by people improving their 9fs
> scripts.
>
>

would be interesting to have a server that provided reliability by
using whatever mirrors are out there and falling over transparently as
things failed.

ron

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Anant Narayanan]

On 24-May-09, at 2:17 AM, ron minnich wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 4:59 PM, J.R. Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There are plenty of mirrors, I'm pretty sure the "sources is down
>> AGAIN" comments could be mitigated by people improving their 9fs
>> scripts.
> would be interesting to have a server that provided reliability by
> using whatever mirrors are out there and falling over transparently as
> things failed.

This approach relies on said server being up all the time. Much easier
to fix client-side 9fs scripts :)

--
Anant

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[ron minnich]

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Anant Narayanan <anant@kix.in> wrote:
> On 24-May-09, at 2:17 AM, ron minnich wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 4:59 PM, J.R. Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There are plenty of mirrors, I'm pretty sure the "sources is down
>>> AGAIN" comments could be mitigated by people improving their 9fs
>>> scripts.
>>
>> would be interesting to have a server that provided reliability by
>> using whatever mirrors are out there and falling over transparently as
>> things failed.
>
> This approach relies on said server being up all the time. Much easier to
> fix client-side 9fs scripts :)

Sorry, by "server" I did not mean "a server machine" I meant "a 9p
server program which you could run"

ron

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Lyndon Nerenberg]

> There are plenty of mirrors, I'm pretty sure the "sources is down
> AGAIN" comments could be mitigated by people improving their 9fs
> scripts

A 9fs.local (ala termrc.loca)l would solve a lot of customization
issues.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[J.R. Mauro]

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:17 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 4:59 PM, J.R. Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There are plenty of mirrors, I'm pretty sure the "sources is down
>> AGAIN" comments could be mitigated by people improving their 9fs
>> scripts.
>>
>>
>
> would be interesting to have a server that provided reliability by
> using whatever mirrors are out there and falling over transparently as
> things failed.

Mycroftiv (on #plan9) was working on some "unkillable" cpu session
that shows promise.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1229 bytes --]

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:31 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Anant Narayanan <anant@kix.in> wrote:
> > On 24-May-09, at 2:17 AM, ron minnich wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 4:59 PM, J.R. Mauro <jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> There are plenty of mirrors, I'm pretty sure the "sources is down
> >>> AGAIN" comments could be mitigated by people improving their 9fs
> >>> scripts.
> >>
> >> would be interesting to have a server that provided reliability by
> >> using whatever mirrors are out there and falling over transparently as
> >> things failed.
> >
> > This approach relies on said server being up all the time. Much easier to
> > fix client-side 9fs scripts :)
>
> Sorry, by "server" I did not mean "a server machine" I meant "a 9p
> server program which you could run"
>

How would one know one wasn't getting old data?  I've not really looked into
replica much though honestly to know how it works, I've just followed the
wiki about "staying up to date".  Perhaps the wiki could be mirrored as
well, and we could get a distributed update script?

Perhaps this is an area of improvement for Plan 9 in general.


>
> ron
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1975 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[jt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 656 bytes --]

Mr Leimbach,

===8<===

>
> How would one know one wasn't getting old data?  I've not really looked
> into replica much though honestly to know how it works, I've just followed
> the wiki about "staying up to date".  Perhaps the wiki could be mirrored as
> well, and we could get a distributed update script?
>
> Perhaps this is an area of improvement for Plan 9 in general.
>
> ===8<===

     You can find the wiki here :
http://9.9souldier.org/wiki.plan9/plan_9_wiki/
     Sources can be found here : sources.lsub.org -- though i'm not sure how
up to date they are -- they seem very reliable

respectfully,

james francis toy (nil)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1055 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Federico G. Benavento]

also at http://9grid.es/wiki/plan_9_wiki/

>> How would one know one wasn't getting old data?  I've not really looked
>> into replica much though honestly to know how it works, I've just followed
>> the wiki about "staying up to date".

eh? then what about reading the man pages? anyways, if you're files are older
than the ones on the server and the logs match you'll get an update, otherwise
you'll get a conflict and changes won't be made to your system

>
>      You can find the wiki here :
> http://9.9souldier.org/wiki.plan9/plan_9_wiki/
>      Sources can be found here : sources.lsub.org -- though i'm not sure how
> up to date they are -- they seem very reliable
>
> respectfully,
>
> james francis toy (nil)
>



-- 
Federico G. Benavento

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 942 bytes --]

On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 4:38 PM, <jt@0xabadba.be> wrote:

> Mr Leimbach,
>
> ===8<===
>
>>
>> How would one know one wasn't getting old data?  I've not really looked
>> into replica much though honestly to know how it works, I've just followed
>> the wiki about "staying up to date".  Perhaps the wiki could be mirrored as
>> well, and we could get a distributed update script?
>>
>> Perhaps this is an area of improvement for Plan 9 in general.
>>
>> ===8<===
>
>      You can find the wiki here :
> http://9.9souldier.org/wiki.plan9/plan_9_wiki/
>      Sources can be found here : sources.lsub.org -- though i'm not sure
> how up to date they are -- they seem very reliable
>
> respectfully,


Yeah I guess I was not very clear.  How does one find the most up to date
mirror :-).  How do we know which one is closest to the authoritative
source, or should we care?

Dave


>
>
> james francis toy (nil)
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1730 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Federico G. Benavento]

this script is probably too naive, but isn't just good enough?

btw, gabriel provides a 9grid.es file to put in /dist/replica

http://9grid.es/index.html?item=srv

; cat $home/bin/rc/pull
#!/bin/rc

rfork e

# network is sources
mirrors=(network 9grid.es kix.in lsub.org)

flags=()
while(! ~ $#* 0 && ~ $1 -*){
	if(~ $1 -c -s){
		flags=($flags $1)
		shift
	}
	flags=($flags $1)
	shift
}
if(test -f /srv/kfs.cmd)
	disk/kfscmd allow

for(i in $mirrors){
	if(replica/pull -v $flags /dist/replica/^$i $*){
		if(test -f /srv/kfs.cmd)
			disk/kfscmd disallow
		exit ''
	}
}

exit mirror


On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 9:28 PM, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 4:38 PM, <jt@0xabadba.be> wrote:
>>
>> Mr Leimbach,
>>
>> ===8<===
>>>
>>> How would one know one wasn't getting old data?  I've not really looked
>>> into replica much though honestly to know how it works, I've just followed
>>> the wiki about "staying up to date".  Perhaps the wiki could be mirrored as
>>> well, and we could get a distributed update script?
>>> Perhaps this is an area of improvement for Plan 9 in general.
>>
>> ===8<===
>>
>>      You can find the wiki here :
>> http://9.9souldier.org/wiki.plan9/plan_9_wiki/
>>      Sources can be found here : sources.lsub.org -- though i'm not sure
>> how up to date they are -- they seem very reliable
>>
>> respectfully,
>
> Yeah I guess I was not very clear.  How does one find the most up to date
> mirror :-).  How do we know which one is closest to the authoritative
> source, or should we care?
> Dave
>
>>
>> james francis toy (nil)
>
>



-- 
Federico G. Benavento

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[andrey mirtchovski]

nobody's saying anything, so i will: a kfs system will be left in an
"allowed" state if all the mirrors fail.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Rudolf Sykora]

> nobody's saying anything, so i will: a kfs system will be left in an
> "allowed" state if all the mirrors fail.

well, knowing little, having come late, perhaps, I do not understand...
Thanks
Ruda

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Federico G. Benavento]

yeah, I noticed the bug the moment I click send :)

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 3:05 AM, andrey mirtchovski
<mirtchovski@gmail.com> wrote:
> nobody's saying anything, so i will: a kfs system will be left in an
> "allowed" state if all the mirrors fail.
>
>



--
Federico G. Benavento

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[cinap_lenrek]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 50 bytes --]

damn, he found out our evil plan...

--
cinap

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3722 bytes --]

From: andrey mirtchovski <mirtchovski@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] sources down?
Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 00:05:05 -0600
Message-ID: <14ec7b180905242305y7e1f3506ued0776e1d12f9db7@mail.gmail.com>

nobody's saying anything, so i will: a kfs system will be left in an
"allowed" state if all the mirrors fail.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Steve Simon]

> damn, he found out our evil plan...

And we would have got away with it if it hadn't been for you pesky kids.

-Steve

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[J.R. Mauro]

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net> wrote:
>> damn, he found out our evil plan...
>
> And we would have got away with it if it hadn't been for you pesky kids.
>

And their TALKING DOG.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[KADOTA Kyohei]

Thanks stevie.

My plan9 box resolved sources.cs.bell-labs.com too.

>> Hello fans.
>>
>> currently, is sources.cs.bell-labs.com down?
>>
>> on my plan9 box:
>>
>> % ndb/dnsquery
>>> sources.cs.bell-labs.com
>> !dns: dns failure
>>> plan9.bell-labs.com
>> plan9.bell-labs.com ip	135.104.24.16
>
> Sources is up again, but it was down for a few hours, I think.
>
>> sources.cs.bell-labs.com
> sources.cs.bell-labs.com ip	135.104.24.18
>
> Stevie
>
>

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[stevie]

> Hello fans.
>
> currently, is sources.cs.bell-labs.com down?
>
> on my plan9 box:
>
> % ndb/dnsquery
>> sources.cs.bell-labs.com
> !dns: dns failure
>> plan9.bell-labs.com
> plan9.bell-labs.com ip	135.104.24.16

Sources is up again, but it was down for a few hours, I think.

> sources.cs.bell-labs.com
sources.cs.bell-labs.com ip	135.104.24.18

Stevie

[9fans] sources down?

[KADOTA Kyohei]

Hello fans.

currently, is sources.cs.bell-labs.com down?

on my plan9 box:

% ndb/dnsquery
> sources.cs.bell-labs.com
!dns: dns failure
> plan9.bell-labs.com
plan9.bell-labs.com ip	135.104.24.16

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Pietro Gagliardi]

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

On Nov 2, 2008, at 4:58 PM, michael block wrote:

> retool them for standard time
isn't that done automatically?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkkOO7wACgkQuv7AVNQDs+yHxgCgqfsq+xr9i710y0c0Wogr7OIT
JpEAoKIGJAe0FvG0ZX+muMnDimc6KoAe
=sVbs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[michael block]

On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 15:35,  <geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> Sources is back up.  We had a power outage and some of our machines
> didn't come back up automatically, though they usually do.

and here i was thinking you had taken them offline to retool them for
standard time ☺. thank you for maintaining sources. it is an
invaluable resource

-- m

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[geoff]

Sources is back up.  We had a power outage and some of our machines
didn't come back up automatically, though they usually do.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Pietro Gagliardi]

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

On Nov 2, 2008, at 1:51 PM, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
> [blank message]

The strangest part? It's been down since this morning (I'm on Murray
Hill time here on Long Island); longer than usual.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkkN+ccACgkQuv7AVNQDs+w/ngCfVIjCGT18ZDUNV6/uynighKDM
dtgAnjJVMoDnAdfV0YN0wFdzhW4fhYbZ
=gcnp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[9fans] sources down?

[Skip Tavakkolian]

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[James Cook]

On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 05:30:40PM -0500, geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> sources is up and I can mount it from inside and outside, with and
> without authentication, though we do get occasional console messages
> like these:
>
> Mon Nov 27 15:16:53: attach main as forsyth: not enough data in auth read
> Mon Nov 27 16:16:12: attach main as forsyth: not enough data in auth read
> Tue Nov 28 09:30:11: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto
> Tue Nov 28 09:30:13: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto
> Wed Nov 29 09:30:11: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto
> Wed Nov 29 09:30:13: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto
>
> In this case, your connection to sources has dropped, so you need to
> remove /srv/sources, and you'll need to be hostowner to do that if you
> don't own /srv/sources, then execute `9fs sources' again.

Removing /srv/sources worked.  Thanks.

- James

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Charles Forsyth]

Mon Nov 27 15:16:53: attach main as forsyth: not enough data in auth read
Mon Nov 27 16:16:12: attach main as forsyth: not enough data in auth read

that will be my drawterm'ing to a cpu server on which i do a 9fs sources without
first doing a fresh auth/factotum to use my keys instead of the cpu server's.

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[geoff]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 918 bytes --]

sources is up and I can mount it from inside and outside, with and
without authentication, though we do get occasional console messages
like these:

Mon Nov 27 15:16:53: attach main as forsyth: not enough data in auth read
Mon Nov 27 16:16:12: attach main as forsyth: not enough data in auth read
Tue Nov 28 09:30:11: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto
Tue Nov 28 09:30:13: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto
Wed Nov 29 09:30:11: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto
Wed Nov 29 09:30:13: attach main as geoff: phase error protocol phase error: read in state SNeedProto

In this case, your connection to sources has dropped, so you need to
remove /srv/sources, and you'll need to be hostowner to do that if you
don't own /srv/sources, then execute `9fs sources' again.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2716 bytes --]

From: james.cook@utoronto.ca
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Cc: 
Subject: [9fans] sources down?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:55:35 -0500
Message-ID: <20061129165535.4w2ewerpljsws0g4@webmail.utoronto.ca>

cpu% 9fs sources
srv tcp!sources.cs.bell-labs.com: mount failed: Hangup

I haven't been able to mount sources today or yesterday.  Can other people?

Re: [9fans] sources down?

[Lyndon Nerenberg]

> I haven't been able to mount sources today or yesterday.  Can other people?

I have it mounted right now.

--lyndon

   Never hit a man with glasses.  Hit him with a baseball bat.

[9fans] sources down?

[james.cook]

cpu% 9fs sources
srv tcp!sources.cs.bell-labs.com: mount failed: Hangup

I haven't been able to mount sources today or yesterday.  Can other people?