-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 15 jun 2010, at 16:42, Mathieu Leduc-Hamel wrote:
I think the most important missed fact is, just how unreliable is PyPI currently? Does anyone know?
Exactly my point, right now, since the code is not completely clear and not tested we don't really know what's supposed to worked and how.
It's really a problem when the only way you have to know if something goes wrong is when your users start complaining...
Is there any Nagios monitoring in place or is there the need to have some external reliability monitoring in place?
I can set up a Nagios machine to check the HTTP status of PyPi. Also, if the earlier described path of PyPi mirroring my the community is chosen I can happily have a server serving PyPi packages in the Netherlands.
I don't think this means what you seem to think it means. If you replace a single point of failure with N points of failure, your overall reliability goes down, not up, since there are now more things to go wrong. Assuming that they're independent points of failure, that means your total number of failures will increase by a factor of N.
This is why we should work on the heart the problem problem, pypi itself and why it's down sometime.
Nobody know exactly what happen, maybe it's not a performance problems.
As you said, we may have the same problem in the future on all mirroring nodes ...
Yes, there should be some more investigative work be done on the reason of the apparent unreliability.
Simon de Vlieger