On Tue, 10 Jul 2000, Lex Spoon wrote:

> I know people complain a lot about the swiki being stable or not, but I
> hardly *ever* see it down.  It certainly doesn't just go down for days
> at a time, which was claimed earlier.
> [...]
> Maybe people are tending to give up after the first try, and never try
> hitting "reload" even once?

I don't complain. When I see it down (like yesterday morning) I send a
short notice to swiki-bugs and that's it. My posting about a mirror was
not only about having a backup when the main swiki is inaccessible, but
would also help taking some load off of it. 

-- Bert

> Bert Freudenberg <bert at isgnw.CS.Uni-Magdeburg.De> wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Jul 2000, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:
> > 
> > > Not surprising during a holiday.  I'm sure Mark and company will have 
> > > it up soon enough.
> > 
> > It's still dead.
> > 
> > > Next step: can we build a redundant slave server that can mirror the 
> > > Swiki and take over the IP address if a heartbeat from the primary 
> > > server fails -- now THAT would be something.  Indeed, perhaps we can 
> > > arrange for it to do reasonable load-balancing in the interim?
> > 
> > There could be a read-only mirror (for example at the european gsug.org
> > site): Each time a page is modified in the master swiki, a rendered
> > version of it could be uploaded to a special directory, an email
> > notification about the changed page would be sent to the mirror, it would
> > fetch the page. While rendering, the "special links" like edit, upload,
> > history etc. should point to the master swiki, while all others should be
> > relative. So if the master goes down, reading would still be possible.
> > 
> > -- Bert
>