| 6 Mar 2024 |
 patka | This wasn't my intention, and I would hate it if the momentum behing this is now gone.
Are we going to wait until there might be a message from somewhere that there is sponsoring, or are we going to ask what the foundation thinks, or maybe continue with the plan that was already made? | 14:43:31 |
 raitobezarius | I don't see any reason to change course given the recent elements | 14:44:20 |
| raitobezarius | For the sake of charitable interpretation, I will write this as Domen being confused | 14:44:44 |
| raitobezarius | As he didn't partake in any relevant meeting regarding cache in the past months AFAIK | 14:45:04 |
| patka | Because I have a feeling that (and it might be very wrong) that the natural course of things happening and what eventually might happen is people losing energy and just leaving it for what it is | 14:45:22 |
| raitobezarius | If that's the case, I would encourage people to communicate that they feel they're losing energy and does not want to engage anymore, it's really hard to do more than that ; Domen is not the infra team | 14:46:12 |
| raitobezarius | Infra team remains empowered to carve their paths and the various baby steps laid out for the next months | 14:46:37 |
| raitobezarius | Next board meeting, we will discuss this suggestion from Domen and I will have more news to share | 14:47:03 |
| patka | In reply to @raitobezarius:matrix.org
I don't see any reason to change course given the recent elements Nor do I, but again, my opinion is not very valuable on this. Just wanted to ask the opinions of the people involved. I think flokli for example said (not really, but that's my interpretation) that he wants to wait until there is a solid plan before going further | 14:47:30 |
| raitobezarius | But I don't see any reason for why we would have a sudden change in course beyond the one we decided for w.r.t to GC in Tuesday's GC WG meeting | 14:47:31 |
| patka | Awesome! | 14:47:43 |
| raitobezarius | Then I will leave the mic to @flokli | 14:47:47 |
 flokli | In reply to @patka_123:matrix.org
Nor do I, but again, my opinion is not very valuable on this. Just wanted to ask the opinions of the people involved. I think flokli for example said (not really, but that's my interpretation) that he wants to wait until there is a solid plan before going further I said I want to pull out of this discussion until there's a clear position, funding secured, all math being done etc. | 14:48:23 |
 edef | In reply to @raitobezarius:matrix.org
This is a *cache*, something doesn't exist or is corrupted? We rebuild it keeping a disaster recovery copy is cheap | 16:50:33 |
| edef | it's really not a big deal | 16:50:40 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @edef1c:matrix.org
keeping a disaster recovery copy is cheap Yes but this is not what we were discussing in that context :p | 16:52:25 |
| raitobezarius | Yes, we can keep additional copies | 16:52:34 |
| raitobezarius | (so that healing is magic and what not) | 16:52:44 |
| edef | in general, throwing around numbers of nines is cute, but none of it means anything until you're specifying what SLOs these are for | 17:01:06 |
| edef | seven nines of durability+availability doesn't mean anything by itself if we're not specifying the details | 17:02:14 |
| edef | available within what timescale? we can get a lot of nines for durability and availability within 14 days latency, we can all keep copies on tape in our basement | 17:03:18 |
| edef | but the question that should be driving the SLO conversation is "what goals do these SLOs accomplish" | 17:05:11 |
| edef | In reply to @whentze:matrix.org
do any cloud providers even have 7-nines SLAs for this kind of service? Glacier, including Glacier Instant Retrieval, claims to offer 11 nines of durability | 17:08:24 |
| edef | i don't have empirical data to support that but i would treat that number with some skepticism | 17:08:37 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @edef1c:matrix.org
i don't have empirical data to support that but i would treat that number with some skepticism I know durability loss in AWS | 17:09:43 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @edef1c:matrix.org
i don't have empirical data to support that but i would treat that number with some skepticism * I know of durability loss stories in AWS | 17:09:48 |
| raitobezarius | And it was under the SLO | 17:09:57 |
| raitobezarius | (yada yada when you know how the sausage is made you know why this happens and in which scale, etC.) | 17:10:25 |
| raitobezarius | * (yada yada when you know how the sausage is made you know why this happens and in which scale, etc.) | 17:10:26 |
| raitobezarius | But I don't think we need to convince folks of the fact that SLO is a budget and you burn into it | 17:11:12 |
