Thread: archives.postgresql.org not responding
I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ...
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ... AFAIK - currently there is maintainance work going on at the CMD hosting facility besides archives also search,planet and the buildfarm are down currently ... Stefan
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ... > > AFAIK - currently there is maintainance work going on at the CMD hosting > facility besides archives also search,planet and the buildfarm are down > currently ... Longer than expected, but everything should be up but buildfarm. I am out of caffeine at this point but will look at buildfarm first thing in the morning. Joshua D. Drake > > > Stefan >
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ...
>>
>> AFAIK - currently there is maintainance work going on at the CMD hosting
>> facility besides archives also search,planet and the buildfarm are down
>> currently ...
> Longer than expected, but everything should be up but buildfarm. I am
> out of caffeine at this point but will look at buildfarm first thing in
> the morning.
Fully understand about lack of caffeine --- but if this was a planned
service outage, some advance notice to pgsql-www would've been
appropriate, no? Or did I just miss it?
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes: >> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: >>> Tom Lane wrote: > Fully understand about lack of caffeine --- but if this was a planned > service outage, some advance notice to pgsql-www would've been > appropriate, no? Or did I just miss it? I sent it to sysadmins, but your point is taken. I will send to both in the future. Joshua D. Drake
On Sunday 22 June 2008 02:45:07 Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> >> Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ...
> >>
> >> AFAIK - currently there is maintainance work going on at the CMD hosting
> >> facility besides archives also search,planet and the buildfarm are down
> >> currently ...
> >
> > Longer than expected, but everything should be up but buildfarm. I am
> > out of caffeine at this point but will look at buildfarm first thing in
> > the morning.
>
> Fully understand about lack of caffeine --- but if this was a planned
> service outage, some advance notice to pgsql-www would've been
> appropriate, no? Or did I just miss it?
>
He sent notice to sysadmins, but not pgsql-www. I'm not sure what the policy
is, but seems like it might be good to send these outage notices to a more
public list as well. (For example, there is currently a notice from Marc
about doing maintanance on mail.postgresql.org which I believe was supposed
to happen last night, though we haven't recieved a followup mail yet)
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
If it involves web infrastructure (ie. archives.postgresql.org), it should go
to pgsql-www ... if it involves non-web infrastructure (ie. ftp) it should go
to sysadmins ...
- --On Sunday, June 22, 2008 17:43:13 -0400 Robert Treat
<xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> On Sunday 22 June 2008 02:45:07 Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> >> Tom Lane wrote:
>> >>> I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ...
>> >>
>> >> AFAIK - currently there is maintainance work going on at the CMD hosting
>> >> facility besides archives also search,planet and the buildfarm are down
>> >> currently ...
>> >
>> > Longer than expected, but everything should be up but buildfarm. I am
>> > out of caffeine at this point but will look at buildfarm first thing in
>> > the morning.
>>
>> Fully understand about lack of caffeine --- but if this was a planned
>> service outage, some advance notice to pgsql-www would've been
>> appropriate, no? Or did I just miss it?
>>
>
> He sent notice to sysadmins, but not pgsql-www. I'm not sure what the policy
> is, but seems like it might be good to send these outage notices to a more
> public list as well. (For example, there is currently a notice from Marc
> about doing maintanance on mail.postgresql.org which I believe was supposed
> to happen last night, though we haven't recieved a followup mail yet)
>
> --
> Robert Treat
> Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
- --
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAkhezKEACgkQ4QvfyHIvDvMovgCfSVhDZUHJNvhUcvJnppUy265P
iBoAn0WbfwLgXe13PlPb50Z9esjBHDJu
=th8R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > If it involves web infrastructure (ie. archives.postgresql.org), it should go > to pgsql-www ... if it involves non-web infrastructure (ie. ftp) it should go > to sysadmins ... Yeah, like I said, next time I will just email both. There are too many "other" facets to what you just said. Joshua D. Drake
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> If it involves web infrastructure (ie. archives.postgresql.org), it
> should go to pgsql-www ... if it involves non-web infrastructure
> (ie. ftp) it should go to sysadmins ...
Well, the point to me is that planned outages should be announced
somewhere where non-admins can see them. Which service is involved
shouldn't determine that.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > If it involves web infrastructure (ie. archives.postgresql.org), it > > should go to pgsql-www ... if it involves non-web infrastructure > > (ie. ftp) it should go to sysadmins ... > > Well, the point to me is that planned outages should be announced > somewhere where non-admins can see them. Which service is involved > shouldn't determine that. Agreed. There should be a join-able list that will tell us about such things. I can't join sysadmins to find out about outages, and www seems to fit that role fine. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +