Removing the single point of failure

[Mark Shuttleworth]

Very happy to get the interfaces mirrorable, that's a great idea. I
think it's a pretty flat filesystem-style set of content.

Mark

On 12/11/16 17:43, Tom Barber wrote:
>
> Thanks for the update Marco.
>
> just to make sure people understand is inference in emails is awful.
> I'm not freaking out or complaining about the outage this stuff
> happens, more just offering mirror support etc should it be seen as a
> good course of minimising outage.
>
> Tom
>
>
> On 12 Nov 2016 17:19, "Marco Ceppi" <marco.ceppi at canonical.com
> <mailto:marco.ceppi at canonical.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hey everyone,
>
>     We're aware of the outage and working to bring the service back
>     online. This is unfortunate, but we're in the process of getting
>     the interfaces.juju.solutions site, folded into the charm store
>     properly. This service has done it's job in providing the initial
>     indexing but as we see today it's become integral to the operation
>     of charm authorship and should be as robust as the charm store itself.
>
>     To address concerns about "what if". Juju, the interfaces site,
>     the charm layers, are all open source projects. While some items
>     aren't directly configurable if we ever did enter a period where
>     Canonical wasn't directly maintaining infrastructure for Juju and
>     Charms the community could uphold these projects and elect to run
>     them directly. Juju is a key platform to Canonical just as it is
>     to you all. While outages like this may occur, we are iterating
>     quickly to make sure projects like the interfaces site are folded
>     into jujucharms.com <http://jujucharms.com> and served with the
>     same level SLA and HA as you've come to expect.
>
>     Marco
>
>     On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 10:44 AM Tom Barber <tom at spicule.co.uk
>     <mailto:tom at spicule.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>         I don't really think Mark is going to do one, my point is that
>         for platforms like this to survive if they depend on central
>         services for build/running etc, the services shouldn't just be
>         maintained by a single entity. 
>
>         HA sure will solve some issues but I also think that
>         distributing ownership also mitigates risk.
>
>
>         On 12 Nov 2016 16:39, "James Beedy" <jamesbeedy at gmail.com
>         <mailto:jamesbeedy at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>             Here's something thats been troubling me for a while,
>             Canonical are the
>             single point of failure with juju. For example, this morning
>             interfaces.juju.solutions appears to be offline, thats not
>             the end of the
>             world but of course I can't download layers from it.
>
>             I entirely second this. Interfaces.juju.solutions needs to
>             have some kind of uptime guarantee, and probably need each
>             component deployed in HA/federated to ensure the uptime.
>
>             Companies/people are building infrastructure around the
>             charm store, interfaces.juju.solutions, and juju itself,
>             what happens when 100 entities realize that their CI (or
>             any critical infrastructure) has been down for an amount
>             of time? For many, this could stunt development and
>             increase budget expenditures.
>
>
>             Similarly, if Mark for whatever reason decided he couldn't
>             be bothered with
>             Juju any more and went and did something else, the users
>             would be without
>             resource that is vital to people building stuff.
>
>
>             I have to disagree with you here. Mark is an amazing
>             driver for these technologies and technology communities,
>             but they exist outside of, and disparate of Mark and
>             Canonical. While the world (as well as these technologies)
>             would undoubtedly not be same if not for Mark's
>             contribution(s), I think the idea here is that the
>             majority of the software in Canonical stack has enough
>             wind under it to survive in the wild.
>
>             Does mirroring capabilities exist for other people to mirror
>             interfaces.juju.solutions and can you tell juju to use
>             another portal? That
>             way, much like maven central, those of us with bandwidth
>             could mirror
>             resources that are vital for smooth running of Juju
>             operations.
>
>             True, mirroring would be huge, but shouldn't be a solution
>             ..... We should deploy the site across multiple az/regions
>             if you ask me :-)
>
>
>
>
>             --
>             Juju mailing list
>             Juju at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Juju at lists.ubuntu.com>
>             Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>             https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>             <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju>
>
>         --
>         Juju mailing list
>         Juju at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Juju at lists.ubuntu.com>
>         Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>         https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>         <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20161118/8b23caba/attachment.html>