On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 11:09 -0700, Tony Lambregts wrote:
> On 12/12/06, Scott Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 19:27 -0700, Brian Vincent wrote:
> > > > I don't know; that strikes me as overkill. We do have rack space
> > > > for more servers, so we certainly could drop
On 12/12/06, Scott Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 19:27 -0700, Brian Vincent wrote:
> > I don't know; that strikes me as overkill. We do have rack space
> > for more servers, so we certainly could drop more in; if someone
> > wants to buy 1U servers, we can put those in
On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 19:27 -0700, Brian Vincent wrote:
> > I don't know; that strikes me as overkill. We do have rack space
> > for more servers, so we certainly could drop more in; if someone
> > wants to buy 1U servers, we can put those in.
>
> Looking at the traffic reports, it seems like the
I don't know; that strikes me as overkill. We do have rack space
for more servers, so we certainly could drop more in; if someone
wants to buy 1U servers, we can put those in.
Looking at the traffic reports, it seems like the WineHQ server is
serving A LOT more than it ever has. We're at 300GB
Hi Tony,
I don't know; that strikes me as overkill. We do have rack space
for more servers, so we certainly could drop more in; if someone
wants to buy 1U servers, we can put those in.
But it seems like adding additional admin work in response to
a single software glitch is a mistake. I think w
What would it take (how much would it cost us) to move the
www.winehq.org site to another server?
We have had this problem for a while now (over a week) that our main
site has been sporaticly unavailable. I appreciate all the work Jeremy
Newman has put into trying to find the problem but I think
