[volunteergrid2-l] Lease expiration

[Shawn Willden]

I'm good with 90 days, unless it starts looking like it's inadequate.

I would, however, recommend that you run an add-lease operation more
frequently then once per month.  Monthly repair cycles are probably
adequate, but adding leases is cheap and I think it should be done more
frequently.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Christoph Langguth <
christoph at rosenkeller.org> wrote:

> Am 06.04.2012 19:30, schrieb Jody Harris:
>
>  Okay. I need to hear from anyone who does not agree with 60 days, or
>> can voice concerns about a 60-day lease expiration.
>>
> Here I am :-D
>
>
>  Unless there is good reason or concern to not adopt a 60-day lease
>> expiration, we will consider it "accepted by consent" in week week
>> from today.
>>
> I'm not in disagreement with lowering the lease expiration at all (in
> fact, I have pumped quite a few gigabytes of what is now garbage onto the
> grid while trying to find out a reliable backup strategy).
>
> I don't have any hard facts against 60 days (just like I wouldn't have
> hard facts in favor, or against, 90, 120, or 360 days). Just two things:
>
> 1. storage is cheap. We're running at roughly 50% of the capacity
> according to the stats. And the stats depict *all* space used on the
> partition (not only VG2 space), but depict only the (potential) space
> available to VG2 (minus root space, minus reserved space). I don't think we
> need to worry about capacity for the next couple of years.
>
> 2. 60 days is not a lot, especially if you run repair cronjobs only
> monthly. I'm personally scheduling repairs every month (with daily backups,
> and weekly synchronizations (="offsite backup uploads")). Repairing may be
> quite expensive (as outlined in some previous mails), so I'm trying to not
> do it toooooo often. Then again, one needs to make sure shares are still
> valid. So -- strike a balance between ... ummm.... overhead and redundancy
> :-D
>
>
> That said, I'm in favor of *90* days.
>
> That's still only 1/4 of the original retention period, and only 50% more
> than the newly proposed one. Meanwhile, it provides 100% more safety if a
> monthly backup fails... and it allows for a more relaxed prolonged overseas
> holiday.
>
> ... just sayin'.
>
> (Actually, no... not just sayin. I'm really against 60 days and propose 90
> instead :D)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> volunteergrid2-l mailing list
> volunteergrid2-l at tahoe-lafs.org
> https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volunteergrid2-l
> http://bigpig.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome
>



-- 
Shawn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/volunteergrid2-l/attachments/20120410/0e57228f/attachment-0001.html>