Things we don't truly need, AFAIK:
* gerolde: all of /srv/ftp/archive/pkgs * gerolde: /srv/ftp/iso and /srv/ftp/archive/iso What is our policy on this stuff? Nostalgic, sure, but usable or necessary? We have all sorts of full and base images, scsi-specific, etc. but outside of keeping arch-0.1 do we really want to appear like we care about previous releases? * gerolde: /srv/cvs * sigurd: Unfortunately not a lot here to kill, and our disk is hovering in that 85% range. * sigurd: /srv/cvs
Pierre, can we adjust CLEANUP_KEEP down to 30? That is still a lot of time and would at least reduce the burden of space of some frequently updated packages.
These are all suggestions, I am not opposed to keeping things if people have a valid reason. But this might also make any backup picture a bit more clear and give us more room and leeway to package some bigger things which seems to be the trend lately.
-Dan
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 15:11:16 -0600, Dan McGee wrote:
Things we don't truly need, AFAIK:
- gerolde: all of /srv/ftp/archive/pkgs
- gerolde: /srv/ftp/iso and /srv/ftp/archive/iso What is our policy on this stuff? Nostalgic, sure, but usable or
necessary? We have all sorts of full and base images, scsi-specific, etc. but outside of keeping arch-0.1 do we really want to appear like we care about previous releases?
Yes, we can save about 16GB with removing the whole archive. Nothing in there is of use imho. And even if in doubt we have a whole history of sources.
- gerolde: /srv/cvs
We never imported those to svn; so with removing those we'll loose some history. But again I don't think there is anything of value in there.
- sigurd: Unfortunately not a lot here to kill, and our disk is
hovering in that 85% range.
- sigurd: /srv/cvs
Pierre, can we adjust CLEANUP_KEEP down to 30? That is still a lot of time and would at least reduce the burden of space of some frequently updated packages.
Sure. Even just two weeks should be enough time to notice that you have accidentally removed a needed package.
These are all suggestions, I am not opposed to keeping things if people have a valid reason. But this might also make any backup picture a bit more clear and give us more room and leeway to package some bigger things which seems to be the trend lately.
I'd rather move some spare bytes to gudrun than adding another huge game package with low usage to the repos. ;-)
On 30/01/11 07:11, Dan McGee wrote:
Things we don't truly need, AFAIK:
- gerolde: all of /srv/ftp/archive/pkgs
- gerolde: /srv/ftp/iso and /srv/ftp/archive/iso What is our policy on this stuff? Nostalgic, sure, but usable or
necessary? We have all sorts of full and base images, scsi-specific, etc. but outside of keeping arch-0.1 do we really want to appear like we care about previous releases?
- gerolde: /srv/cvs
- sigurd: Unfortunately not a lot here to kill, and our disk is
hovering in that 85% range.
- sigurd: /srv/cvs
* gerolde /srv/ftp/other: We can remove old source tarballs that are no longer needed from there directories.
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org wrote:
On 30/01/11 07:11, Dan McGee wrote:
Things we don't truly need, AFAIK:
- gerolde: all of /srv/ftp/archive/pkgs
- gerolde: /srv/ftp/iso and /srv/ftp/archive/iso
What is our policy on this stuff? Nostalgic, sure, but usable or necessary? We have all sorts of full and base images, scsi-specific, etc. but outside of keeping arch-0.1 do we really want to appear like we care about previous releases?
- gerolde: /srv/cvs
- sigurd: Unfortunately not a lot here to kill, and our disk is
hovering in that 85% range.
- sigurd: /srv/cvs
- gerolde /srv/ftp/other: We can remove old source tarballs that are no
longer needed from there directories.
* /var/log : we could configure logrotate to compress the old logs. That'll save some space.
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Eric Bélanger snowmaniscool@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Allan McRae allan@archlinux.org wrote:
On 30/01/11 07:11, Dan McGee wrote:
Things we don't truly need, AFAIK:
- gerolde: all of /srv/ftp/archive/pkgs
- gerolde: /srv/ftp/iso and /srv/ftp/archive/iso
I didn't delete the ISOs yet, but I did zap /srv/ftp/archive/pkgs. I'll wait a few more days to see if anyone has strong opinions.
What is our policy on this stuff? Nostalgic, sure, but usable or necessary? We have all sorts of full and base images, scsi-specific, etc. but outside of keeping arch-0.1 do we really want to appear like we care about previous releases?
- gerolde: /srv/cvs
This is "gone"; the contents of /srv/cvs is available in /srv/cvs.tar.xz if ever necessary.
- sigurd: Unfortunately not a lot here to kill, and our disk is
hovering in that 85% range.
- sigurd: /srv/cvs
Gone; it was the same as what was on gerolde.
- gerolde /srv/ftp/other: We can remove old source tarballs that are no
longer needed from there directories.
@Remy: the biggest thing here taking up space is texlive stuff. Can you make it part of your release process to clean this up every once in a while? You don't necessarily need to delete all old versions, but we probably don't need more than 1 or 2 previous ones.
OpenOffice was the other big culprit, I removed a few of those, and also some glibc snapshots from <2010.
- /var/log : we could configure logrotate to compress the old logs.
That'll save some space.
It would, but not really space on the right partitions. We already compress HTTP logs on both servers that have them and that is the bulk of the needed space. mail.log is big on gerolde but that partition has plenty of room.
@Pierre: thanks for adjusting CLEANUP_KEEP.
-Dan
Am 31.01.2011 17:35, schrieb Dan McGee:
What is our policy on this stuff? Nostalgic, sure, but usable or necessary? We have all sorts of full and base images, scsi-specific, etc. but outside of keeping arch-0.1 do we really want to appear like we care about previous releases?
- gerolde: /srv/cvs
This is "gone"; the contents of /srv/cvs is available in /srv/cvs.tar.xz if ever necessary.
Last I checked, there was still a rsync cronjob for this. *shrugs*
On 2011/1/31 Dan McGee dpmcgee@gmail.com wrote:
- gerolde /srv/ftp/other: We can remove old source tarballs that are no
longer needed from there directories.
@Remy: the biggest thing here taking up space is texlive stuff. Can you make it part of your release process to clean this up every once in a while? You don't necessarily need to delete all old versions, but we probably don't need more than 1 or 2 previous ones.
I freed about 700MB.
arch-dev-public@lists.archlinux.org