From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25166 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2010 19:07:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 27839 Received: (qmail 6377 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2010 19:07:26 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at benizi.com designates 64.130.10.15 as permitted sender) Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:07:21 -0400 (EDT) From: "Benjamin R. Haskell" To: Zsh Workers Subject: Re: SourceForge CVS down for the weekend, it looks like In-Reply-To: <733654e31003271118k1b33cb7fx9ec5de3d7249fa96@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <100326203425.ZM29478@torch.brasslantern.com> <733654e31003270902s7076ef9dxdc17e0ea6e59b987@mail.gmail.com> <733654e31003271118k1b33cb7fx9ec5de3d7249fa96@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.01 (LNX 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-1463810530-1157970787-1269716841=:19615" ---1463810530-1157970787-1269716841=:19615 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Sat, 27 Mar 2010, Wayne Davison wrote: > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Benjamin R. Haskell wrote: > if the SF git server were to go down, how is it any different > than the SF CVS server going down? > > > There are multiple git servers, all of which share the load for > serving every git request, no matter the project.  CVS doesn't play > well with shared storage, For anyone else interested in specifics, googling CVS NFS comes up with this thread[1], but more interesting was Linus's explanation of how git avoids NFS problems[2]. (NFS being the natural search term when "doesn't play well" and "shared storage" are mentioned.) > so there is just one cvs server for a particular project that is > active at any one time. This means that there are outages for > maintenance, outages for fail-overs, etc., more-so than there'd be > with git. Thanks for the explanation. Makes sense now. -- Best, Ben [1] CVS and NFS - ~4.5 years old - http://mongers.org/cvs#cvs_nfs [2] what's the current wisdom on git over NFS/CIFS? - 2009-07-02 - http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/122670 ---1463810530-1157970787-1269716841=:19615--