[Webteam] File cleanups, yes... again

[Jason Rogers]

I could implement it.  It shouldn't be too hard right?  I don't know
about how to save the image as another image name though.  Once I find
how to do that it will be easy:

  1. Capture current image name
  2. Snapshot as backup image first
  3. Snapshot as current image

Right?  There aren't any gotchas are there?

On Dec 18, 2007 10:59 AM, Karl <karl.ramberg at comhem.se> wrote:
> Jason Rogers wrote:
> > I will hop on as soon as I can to take care of this.  I am in New York
> > right now and unable (company firewall) to access the box.  We really
> > need a better backup policy in general, but I don't know what to do.
> > Perhaps we don't use a Unix process at all.  We could schedule a
> > process in the images that will snapshot the image as a current and a
> > backup.
> >
> > What do you all think?
> >
> Sounds good. We already do manual image save on each change on the
> Smallwiki process. Maybe a similar backup button would be enough ? Do
> you want to implement it?
> Karl
>
> > On Dec 17, 2007 6:56 PM, Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 00:45 +0100, karl wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ken Causey wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> We are climbing up above 90% disk usage on box2 so time for another
> >>>> audit.  Previously I managed to talk you into a more conservative backup
> >>>> schedule.  Now I would like to ask you to cleanup what is being backed
> >>>> up.  A little nosing around indicates that you are backing up a lot of
> >>>> files that I suspect were just used in setting up the sites/testing and
> >>>> or just junk at this point:
> >>>>
> >>>> # tar ztf backups/foundation/2007-12-17-0005.tgz
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5-maybe-bad.image
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5-safe.image
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5-safe.old.image
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5.image
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5.old.image
> >>>> SqueakFoundation.image
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5-maybe-bad.changes
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5-safe.changes
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5-safe.old.changes
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5.changes
> >>>> SqF-Pier-1.5.old.changes
> >>>> SqueakFoundation.changes
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Squeak foundation images are not used at all. Brad Fuller put a lot of
> >>> effort into it but the foundation is a a few pages in the squeak.org
> >>> image. You can delete foundation directory and backups
> >>>
> >> I'd prefer if Brad could confirm he has no more interest in any of that
> >> content and one of you take care of it.
> >>
> >>
> >>>> # tar ztf backups/2007-12-17-0005.tgz
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.1.image
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.backup.image
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.image
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.1.changes
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.backup.changes
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.changes
> >>>>
> >>>> s# tar ztf backups/testing/2007-12-17-0005.tgz
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.backup.image
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.image
> >>>> wwwtest.squeak.org.backup.image
> >>>> wwwtest.squeak.org.image
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.backup.changes
> >>>> smallwikiSnapshot.changes
> >>>> wwwtest.squeak.org.backup.changes
> >>>> wwwtest.squeak.org.changes
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I'm not at all sure how backup is run. I screwed up the squeak.org image
> >>> a few years back and found that the images backed up were useless
> >>> because they were copied from a unix process on a running image I think.
> >>> We need backup of squeak.org image.
> >>>
> >> That's fine, but even the backup of the main site involves backing up 3
> >> image and changes file sets.  I can maybe imagine 2 sets (current and
> >> previous to last modification), but 3?
> >>
> >>
> >>> The wwwtest.squeak.org image we hardly use anymore, but it is good for
> >>> testing major changes to style scripts etc. wwwtest.squeak.org does not
> >>> need backup now. I guess we can turn backup on when someone get the urge
> >>> to hack at stuff.
> >>>
> >> Either that or just scale back the extent to which wwwtest is backed up.
> >> Again, I'm primarily concerned about the backing up of files which never
> >> change.
> >>
> >>
> >>>> Are all of these files needed at all, much less needing to be backed up
> >>>> over and over again?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I guess not
> >>>
> >>>> The home directory for the website team totals 4.3GB.  Since there is an
> >>>> rsync backup also on the server that is doubled, and then any images
> >>>> that change are backed up in their entirety again.  So in effect the
> >>>> website team ends up using perhaps as much as 10GB on the server.
> >>>> Anything you can do to lower this I would greatly appreciate.
> >>>>
> >>> I think you can delete all the files I mentioned.
> >>>
> >> I'd rather not delete anything myself.  However designed the backup
> >> process of course would need to change that.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Ken
> >>
> >>
> >>> Karl
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Webteam mailing list
> >> Webteam at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webteam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>



-- 
Jason Rogers

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live;
yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life
which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of
the Son of God, who loved me, and gave
himself for me."
    Galatians 2:20