Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Arch Configuration: Replication and fail safe

[ALEJANDROLANDIM]

Brian May wrote:
> >>>>> "ALEJANDROLANDIM" == ALEJANDROLANDIM  <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> I'd like to have two or more machines always
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> synchronized using tla.  I want to have
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> replication and be virus/trojan safe.
> 
> I am not sure precisely of your requirements, do you want
> - the arch archive to be synchronized?
Yes, I want the arch archive synchronized, but I don't want a exact copy
of the archive. If some machine removes some files and the history I
don't want any other machine to remove the history, that won't let me
recover the missing files.

> - a copy of the project files to be synchronized between the two computers?
I want all the changesets in all the computers.
And having the project files synchronized is a consequence of that.

> - both?
Yes.

> What type of data?
At first I just want to have simple text files and binary files, but
later I'd like to have databases (that would require modifying tla to
work great with binary database tables)

> For a starting point, lookup the section in the tutorial on creating
> and using mirrors.
> 
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> If one machine disappears, then the other ones
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> have all the information.  If one machine gets
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> compromised and the archive modified without
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> knowledge of anyone the other machines have all
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> the changesets and a possible alarm could go on
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> notifying that some mirror is in bad state.
> 
> Also, lookup information on using GPG with the latest development
> versions of TLA.
> 
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> Is this configuration possible?  Can the machines
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> replicate automatically (whenever there is a link
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> between them) using SSL or SSH or GPG?  Do you
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> have any better configuration?  Anyone knows
>     ALEJANDROLANDIM> about other solutions?
> 
> It should be possible. Is it feasible and the best solution for you?
> You will have to work that out.

I think this is the best solution to manage data for most people.
I'd like to know how people manage their data and if this configuration
should me good enough.

> I once tried using arch to manage my website (327 Megs, most of it is
> binary photos), but concluded that TLA was extremely slow to manage
> such data (I suspect this will improve with proposed optimizations),
> even with a revision tree. Not to mention the other issue of limited
> disk space on the server ;-).

Yes, I'd like to have websites managed with tla using my proposed
configuration.

> For now, I have abandoned this approach, although I have kept the *.id
> files around to make it easier to redo at a latter date.

I'd like to know what problems do you see currently in arch that makes
this approach not feasible. I'd also like to know when you start using
arch again.