Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » If we have to move to the backup server...
| If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65673] |
Thu, 23 March 2006 15:30  |
Kim
Messages: 1246
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails completely,
seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this is
what will happen...
1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of late,
but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last remembered
to push the "back it up" button.
2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes slightly.
I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
even older than the one on the main box ;o)
3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are different
on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when deciding
what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the worst
happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the newsgroup
(and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you download
all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the backup
server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which link
to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of the
above.
Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under emergency
conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and should
be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a "disaster
recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to see
if it happens.
Cheers,
Kim.
|
|
|
|
| Re: If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65674 is a reply to message #65673] |
Thu, 23 March 2006 14:58  |
Sound Dog
Messages: 44
Registered: October 2005
|
Member |
|
|
Thanks Kim,
I really appreciate the work you put into keeping the PNG alive.
Cheers,
Stewart.
Kim wrote in message <442321a3$1@linux>...
>
>
>OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
>
>If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails
completely,
>seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this is
>what will happen...
>
>1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of
late,
>but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last
remembered
>to push the "back it up" button.
>
>2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes slightly.
>I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
>even older than the one on the main box ;o)
>
>3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are different
>on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
>for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when deciding
>what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the worst
>happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the newsgroup
>(and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you download
>all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the backup
>server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which link
>to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of the
>above.
>
>Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under
emergency
>conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
>perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and
should
>be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
>
>I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a "disaster
>recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to see
>if it happens.
>
>Cheers,
>Kim.
|
|
|
|
| Re: If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65676 is a reply to message #65674] |
Thu, 23 March 2006 16:20 |
Kim
Messages: 1246
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thanks, but i've never even been to Papua New Guinea. ;o)
Cheers,
Kim.
"Sound Dog" <dogster@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>Thanks Kim,
>
>I really appreciate the work you put into keeping the PNG alive.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Stewart.
>
>
>Kim wrote in message <442321a3$1@linux>...
>>
>>
>>OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
>>
>>If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails
>completely,
>>seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this
is
>>what will happen...
>>
>>1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of
>late,
>>but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last
>remembered
>>to push the "back it up" button.
>>
>>2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes slightly.
>>I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
>>even older than the one on the main box ;o)
>>
>>3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are different
>>on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
>>for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when deciding
>>what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the worst
>>happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the newsgroup
>>(and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you download
>>all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the backup
>>server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which link
>>to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of
the
>>above.
>>
>>Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under
>emergency
>>conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
>>perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and
>should
>>be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
>>
>>I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a "disaster
>>recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to
see
>>if it happens.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Kim.
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65680 is a reply to message #65676] |
Thu, 23 March 2006 18:03 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
If'n I forget to take the dogs for a walk and leave them inside all day,
there is the possibility of coming home to some major papua.
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:44232d33$1@linux...
>
>
> Thanks, but i've never even been to Papua New Guinea. ;o)
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
>
> "Sound Dog" <dogster@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> >Thanks Kim,
> >
> >I really appreciate the work you put into keeping the PNG alive.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Stewart.
> >
> >
> >Kim wrote in message <442321a3$1@linux>...
> >>
> >>
> >>OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
> >>
> >>If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails
> >completely,
> >>seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this
> is
> >>what will happen...
> >>
> >>1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of
> >late,
> >>but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last
> >remembered
> >>to push the "back it up" button.
> >>
> >>2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes
slightly.
> >>I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
> >>even older than the one on the main box ;o)
> >>
> >>3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are
different
> >>on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
> >>for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when
deciding
> >>what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the
worst
> >>happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the
newsgroup
> >>(and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you
download
> >>all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the
backup
> >>server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which
link
> >>to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of
> the
> >>above.
> >>
> >>Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under
> >emergency
> >>conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
> >>perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and
> >should
> >>be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
> >>
> >>I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a
"disaster
> >>recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to
> see
> >>if it happens.
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Kim.
> >
> >
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65699 is a reply to message #65673] |
Fri, 24 March 2006 10:48 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>getting posts which link to the wrong posts... getting double ups of
posts, or combinations of the above.<
This sounds like it might actually be fun.........someone asks a question
about a tptque error and get an answer relating to why a certain mobo is
best used in the kitchen for frying eggs.
;o)
"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:442321a3$1@linux...
>
>
> OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
>
> If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails
completely,
> seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this is
> what will happen...
>
> 1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of
late,
> but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last
remembered
> to push the "back it up" button.
>
> 2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes
slightly.
> I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
> even older than the one on the main box ;o)
>
> 3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are different
> on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
> for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when deciding
> what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the
worst
> happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the
newsgroup
> (and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you
download
> all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the backup
> server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which link
> to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of the
> above.
>
> Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under
emergency
> conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
> perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and
should
> be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
>
> I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a "disaster
> recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to see
> if it happens.
>
> Cheers,
> Kim.
|
|
|
|
| Re: If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65701 is a reply to message #65699] |
Fri, 24 March 2006 10:59 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I didn't know Behringer was making computer motherboards now....
hmmmm, must have missed the memo...
David.
DJ wrote:
>>getting posts which link to the wrong posts... getting double ups of
>
> posts, or combinations of the above.<
>
> This sounds like it might actually be fun.........someone asks a question
> about a tptque error and get an answer relating to why a certain mobo is
> best used in the kitchen for frying eggs.
>
> ;o)
>
>
> "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:442321a3$1@linux...
>
>>
>>OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
>>
>>If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails
>
> completely,
>
>>seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this is
>>what will happen...
>>
>>1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of
>
> late,
>
>>but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last
>
> remembered
>
>>to push the "back it up" button.
>>
>>2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes
>
> slightly.
>
>>I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
>>even older than the one on the main box ;o)
>>
>>3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are different
>>on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
>>for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when deciding
>>what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the
>
> worst
>
>>happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the
>
> newsgroup
>
>>(and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you
>
> download
>
>>all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the backup
>>server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which link
>>to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of the
>>above.
>>
>>Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under
>
> emergency
>
>>conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
>>perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and
>
> should
>
>>be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
>>
>>I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a "disaster
>>recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to see
>>if it happens.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Kim.
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65706 is a reply to message #65701] |
Fri, 24 March 2006 12:41 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I dunno.........I had a UAD-1 card fry the other day. In fact, this is the
thrid UAD-1 card since 2001 that has given up.
"EK Sound" <askme@nospam.com> wrote in message news:44244345$1@linux...
> I didn't know Behringer was making computer motherboards now....
> hmmmm, must have missed the memo...
>
> David.
>
> DJ wrote:
> >>getting posts which link to the wrong posts... getting double ups of
> >
> > posts, or combinations of the above.<
> >
> > This sounds like it might actually be fun.........someone asks a
question
> > about a tptque error and get an answer relating to why a certain mobo is
> > best used in the kitchen for frying eggs.
> >
> > ;o)
> >
> >
> > "Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:442321a3$1@linux...
> >
> >>
> >>OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
> >>
> >>If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails
> >
> > completely,
> >
> >>seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this
is
> >>what will happen...
> >>
> >>1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of
> >
> > late,
> >
> >>but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last
> >
> > remembered
> >
> >>to push the "back it up" button.
> >>
> >>2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes
> >
> > slightly.
> >
> >>I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
> >>even older than the one on the main box ;o)
> >>
> >>3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are
different
> >>on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
> >>for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when
deciding
> >>what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the
> >
> > worst
> >
> >>happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the
> >
> > newsgroup
> >
> >>(and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you
> >
> > download
> >
> >>all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the
backup
> >>server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which
link
> >>to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of
the
> >>above.
> >>
> >>Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under
> >
> > emergency
> >
> >>conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
> >>perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and
> >
> > should
> >
> >>be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
> >>
> >>I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a
"disaster
> >>recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to
see
> >>if it happens.
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>Kim.
> >
> >
> >
|
|
|
|
| Re: If we have to move to the backup server... [message #65707 is a reply to message #65706] |
Fri, 24 March 2006 12:45 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Try not inserting UAD plugs on your accordian tracks... that might
help... ;-)
David.
DJ wrote:
> I dunno.........I had a UAD-1 card fry the other day. In fact, this is the
> thrid UAD-1 card since 2001 that has given up.
>
>
> "EK Sound" <askme@nospam.com> wrote in message news:44244345$1@linux...
>
>>I didn't know Behringer was making computer motherboards now....
>>hmmmm, must have missed the memo...
>>
>>David.
>>
>>DJ wrote:
>>
>>>>getting posts which link to the wrong posts... getting double ups of
>>>
>>>posts, or combinations of the above.<
>>>
>>>This sounds like it might actually be fun.........someone asks a
>
> question
>
>>>about a tptque error and get an answer relating to why a certain mobo is
>>>best used in the kitchen for frying eggs.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>>"Kim" <hiddensounds@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:442321a3$1@linux...
>
>>>>OK, just in case... just so you are all aware of what would happen.
>>>>
>>>>If we end up moving to the backup server because the main server fails
>>>
>>>completely,
>>>
>>>
>>>>seeing as the main server is a little temporamental at the moment, this
>
> is
>
>>>>what will happen...
>>>>
>>>>1) We'll lose a few posts. I've been doing backups fairly regularily of
>>>
>>>late,
>>>
>>>
>>>>but we could lose a day, two, or up to a week depending on when I last
>>>
>>>remembered
>>>
>>>
>>>>to push the "back it up" button.
>>>>
>>>>2) Web users may find that the site at news.newsgroup.com changes
>>>
>>>slightly.
>>>
>>>
>>>>I think there's an older version of the site on the backup machine (yes,
>>>>even older than the one on the main box ;o)
>>>>
>>>>3) Now this is the wierd and important bit. The post numbers are
>
> different
>
>>>>on the backup server to the main server. This will therefore cause havoc
>>>>for users of newsgroup clients, which work off post numbers when
>
> deciding
>
>>>>what to download, and which posts link to which. The solution? If the
>>>
>>>worst
>>>
>>>
>>>>happens and we move to backup, you'll probably need to delete the
>>>
>>>newsgroup
>>>
>>>
>>>>(and perhaps server) from your client and put it back, so that you
>>>
>>>download
>>>
>>>
>>>>all the posts again. This will update the post numbers to match the
>
> backup
>
>>>>server. Otherwise you'll be not getting posts... getting posts which
>
> link
>
>>>>to the wrong posts... getting double ups of posts, or combinations of
>
> the
>
>>>>above.
>>>>
>>>>Now this all only matters if we have to move to the backup server under
>>>
>>>emergency
>>>
>>>
>>>>conditions. If I go and buy a new machine and reload it from scratch and
>>>>perform a controlled changeover then I can line up the post numbers and
>>>
>>>should
>>>
>>>
>>>>be able to switch servers without anybody even noticing.
>>>>
>>>>I just thought, seeing there seems to be a chance of us having a
>
> "disaster
>
>>>>recovery" situation I'd better inform you all of what you're likely to
>
> see
>
>>>>if it happens.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Kim.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Dec 12 09:51:22 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.06947 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
