Subject: archives.postgresql.org not responding

From: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 13:57:01 -0400

I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ...

			regards, tom lane

---

From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:01:58 +0200

> I've been seeing connection timeouts for the last little while ...

AFAIK - currently there is maintainance work going on at the CMD hosting 
facility besides archives also search,planet and the buildfarm are down 
currently  ...

Stefan

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 23:14:40 -0700

> facility besides archives also search,planet and the buildfarm are down 

Longer than expected, but everything should be up but buildfarm. I am 
out of caffeine at this point but will look at buildfarm first thing in 
the morning.

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 02:45:07 -0400

> out of caffeine at this point but will look at buildfarm first thing in 

Fully understand about lack of caffeine --- but if this was a planned
service outage, some advance notice to pgsql-www would've been
appropriate, no?  Or did I just miss it?

			regards, tom lane

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 12:43:18 -0700

> appropriate, no?  Or did I just miss it?

I sent it to sysadmins, but your point is taken. I will send to both in 
the future.

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 17:43:13 -0400

> appropriate, no?  Or did I just miss it?

He sent notice to sysadmins, but not pgsql-www. I'm not sure what the policy 
is, but seems like it might be good to send these outage notices to a more 
public list as well. (For example, there is currently a notice from Marc 
about doing maintanance on mail.postgresql.org which I believe was supposed 
to happen last night, though we haven't recieved a followup mail yet)

-- 
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 19:05:21 -0300

If it involves web infrastructure (ie. archives.postgresql.org), it should go 
to pgsql-www ... if it involves non-web infrastructure (ie. ftp) it should go 
to sysadmins ...

- --On Sunday, June 22, 2008 17:43:13 -0400 Robert Treat 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> Sent via pgsql-www mailing list ([email-masked])
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www

- -- 
Marc G. Fournier        Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A. (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [email-masked]                              MSN . [email-masked]
Yahoo . yscrappy               Skype: hub.org        ICQ . 7615664

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 15:22:20 -0700

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 

Yeah, like I said, next time I will just email both. There are too many 
"other" facets to what you just said.

Joshua D. Drake

---

From: Tom Lane <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:43:45 -0400

"Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]> writes:
> If it involves web infrastructure (ie. archives.postgresql.org), it
> should go to pgsql-www ... if it involves non-web infrastructure
> (ie. ftp) it should go to sysadmins ...

Well, the point to me is that planned outages should be announced
somewhere where non-admins can see them.  Which service is involved
shouldn't determine that.

			regards, tom lane

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 21:48:57 -0400 (EDT)

> shouldn't determine that.

Agreed.  There should be a join-able list that will tell us about such
things.  I can't join sysadmins to find out about outages, and www seems
to fit that role fine.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[email-masked]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +