On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 3:19 AM, <Ullrich.Jans_at_elektrobit.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm running a rather large Subversion installation (>1000 repos, >1 TB total storage, >1000 users). I'm looking for advice how to improve our availability. We're currently quite good, but I'm a bit worried about e.g. hardware failure. Performance is not an issue for now (machine load <2, at about 20 svn-requests per second).
>
> How are you out there doing it? I have a few ideas, but I'd like to hear the opinions of others and get maybe some pointers for more research.
Go call WanDisco. They have *precisely* this sort of high availability
setup in their commercial offerings, with consensus based selection of
a Subversion "master" among a set of synchronized distinct Subversion
servers, and I strongly suspect it's a lot more economical to buy
their product than spend your time implementing it from scratch.
> My ideas:
>
> * use svnsync replication. Drawback: failure needs manual intervention, hook scripts need to be transferred manually.
> * use an active-passive cluster with e.g. heartbeat. That would be possible, the data reside on a SAN anyway.
> * use an active-active cluster with two separate machines sharing the storage via a cluster fs (GFS? GPFS?) with a HA load balancer in front. Probably the sexiest solution ;-)
> * I already discarded the idea of using active-active with NFS since I can remember the reports of strange failures...
>
> Does anyone here know how other large/high profile sites (e.g. the Apache foundation) are ensuring availability? I couldn't find any hints at the website...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ulli
>
> --
> Ullrich Jans, Specialist, IT-A
> Phone: +49 9131 7701-6627, mailto:ullrich.jans_at_elektrobit.com
> Fax: +49 9131 7701-6333, www.elektrobit.com
>
> Elektrobit Automotive GmbH, Am Wolfsmantel 46, 91058 Erlangen, Germany Managing Directors: Alexander Kocher, Gregor Zink Register Court Fürth HRB 4886
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Please note: This e-mail may contain confidential information
> intended solely for the addressee. If you have received this
> e-mail in error, please do not disclose it to anyone, notify
> the sender promptly, and delete the message from your system.
> Thank you.
>
Received on 2012-10-04 10:30:50 CEST