| 2 Mar 2024 |
 raitobezarius | I personally think buying the HW comes cheaper in the end | 01:58:30 |
| raitobezarius | But then we have to manage HW | 01:58:34 |
| raitobezarius | I already do it for a bunch of hardware, but it's not something that thousands of people depend on, so it's another discussion | 01:58:57 |
 nh2 | Theoretically it does not matter so much. You can buy the HW, ship it to hetzner, and pay them 21 EUR for 15 minutes "Remote hands"
https://docs.hetzner.com/robot/colocation/faq/#can-hetzner-online-install-my-hardware | 01:59:34 |
| raitobezarius | People may have other ideas like freezing the bucket in Glacier temporarily, then sending it to R2/Backblaze B2, or doing slow transfer proxy by replicating any data that gets requested via Fastly | 01:59:35 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @nh2:matrix.org
Theoretically it does not matter so much. You can buy the HW, ship it to hetzner, and pay them 21 EUR for 15 minutes "Remote hands"
https://docs.hetzner.com/robot/colocation/faq/#can-hetzner-online-install-my-hardware Yeah, I guess | 02:00:24 |
| raitobezarius | I just don't know if we can afford or if we want to go for Hetzner Colo vs. Hetzner managed hardware if we go for a Hetzner service | 02:00:42 |
| raitobezarius | All of that is very fuzzy in my mind and dependent on current infrastructure team decisions / will | 02:00:54 |
| raitobezarius | So I would rather avoid pushing on them anything | 02:01:00 |
| raitobezarius | Also why I build my own solution on my side | 02:01:10 |
| raitobezarius | Overall, what I believe is that if someone comes in and drops 50K on the Foundation for the objective of duplicating the binary cache to save it, it's a solved problem | 02:01:46 |
| raitobezarius | Under that amount, you are kinda stuck having to ask the Foundation to consider taking the risk | 02:01:57 |
| raitobezarius | And it's not clear that it's a right choice or not | 02:02:04 |
| nh2 | For your colo, does it offer separate datacenters that isolated failure domains against fire? | 02:02:15 |
| raitobezarius | vs. garbage collecting and giving up on that data and preparing for the next set of data | 02:02:17 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @nh2:matrix.org
For your colo, does it offer separate datacenters that isolated failure domains against fire? Nope | 02:02:27 |
| raitobezarius | If that was a goal, I would just send things in Glacier that I really care about, e.g. FODs | 02:02:56 |
| raitobezarius | In cache.nixos.org, there's cache :) | 02:03:02 |
| raitobezarius | Actually, cache.nixos.org was unavailable a lot of times | 02:03:20 |
| raitobezarius | But no one notice it in general | 02:03:23 |
| raitobezarius | Because a CDN is in front of it so… | 02:03:36 |
| nh2 | I mean in Hetzner it's a standard setup to setup servers different data centers to ensure proper HA | 02:04:32 |
| raitobezarius | Yes, yes, if we have the means and money | 02:04:49 |
| raitobezarius | Let's go for multi-site HA | 02:04:53 |
| raitobezarius | But again, from my PoV (maybe wrong?), short of sponsoring from hardware manufacturers or companies, it's hard to support those costs upfront | 02:06:06 |
| raitobezarius | Let's say, if HW manufacturers said: here's disks, here's servers (cheap in the context anyhow), and we could just pay colo, that'd be interesting | 02:06:30 |
| raitobezarius | etc. | 02:06:33 |
| nh2 | This is not what I mean. I mean that if you buy the hardware for a colo, it costs a fixed price. You could put it into your colo in France, or in Hetzner, where you would get proper HA. | 02:06:33 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @nh2:matrix.org
This is not what I mean. I mean that if you buy the hardware for a colo, it costs a fixed price. You could put it into your colo in France, or in Hetzner, where you would get proper HA. This, I don't disagree | 02:06:56 |
| raitobezarius | But what's your point regarding that? | 02:07:07 |
