[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Change request

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Dennis Gilmore wrote:

> On Tuesday 29 April 2008, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > Mike McGrath (mmcgrath redhat com) said:
> > > > > Assuming we're not going to run out of space once we have 2/3/4
> > > > > secondary arches, +1.
> > > >
> > > > Actually I have no space requirements for anything other then ia64
> > > > right now so I cannot say whether we will or won't run out of space for
> > > > the other arches.
> > >
> > > Do we want to spec out for this build (ia64 requirements) x 3? Do we
> > > have that sort of space available?
> >
> > Not sure if we do or not.  Dennis, is ia64 the benchmark for secondary
> > archs?  Can we just multiply it * 3?  Also what are the updates
> > requirements / release for these archs?
> +1 from me
> as far as requirements  sparc/sparc64  will be ~ same as ppc/ppc64  ia64,
> alpha, arm  should be close to i386   s390 im not sure but im guessing
> similar to sparc unless they only build for s390x and drop support for s390
> though alpha, arm, and s390 lag behind sparc which is behind ia64.

So the actual number we should be using to reserve space for an arch for a
release is..?  I really really really need someone to find that number and
commit to it and its essential that the number be correct.  We have done a
horrid job of guessing how much space we need for things and its caused a
lot of needless headaches.

It's not easy to guess how much space we need.  There's a lot of parts
involved, especially when you start talking about isos and updates.  So
lets not guess.  Lets do some research and get that number.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]