LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


ZNG@C4VLPLISTSERV01.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  April 2010

ZNG April 2010

Subject:

Re: Add "reliability" index to CQL's "zeerex" context set

From:

"Edward C. Zimmermann" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors

Date:

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:02:47 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (86 lines)

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:51:36 +0100, Mike Taylor wrote
> Peter, we didn't envisage this as something that servers self-report,
> but as something measured from the outside. To a client, it's

Measured by whom? Do you propose as a group developing a reference globally
distributed monitoring service? This could be quite nice and very useful.
Many of us have multi-homed networks and together I think we span the globe.


> irrelevant whether a server is running off a UPS, for example: all we
> care about is whether we can contact and search in and retrieve from
> the server.

But from where?

>
> In IRSpy (http://irspy.indexdata.com/) the reliability measurement
> simply indicates how often the server responded to connection
> requests. It's a trivialised notion of what it means to be

Responded to YOUR requests. If they are your servers then its self-reporting
and with (beyond your own network) wholly personal semantics.


> "available", but as is so often the case, 10% of the work gets you
> 90% of that functionality, and it's functionality that we need. (I

That's fine. It may be what you feel you need but looking at what people in
large numbers think they need, for instance, in the Web sector.. its not ...


> deliberately proposed a vague semantics statement for availability
> because I don't want to enforce that rather dumb definition of
> availability on everyone who uses it.)

If you really need to say something without meaning.. why bother?

>
> Similarly, Ed Zimmerman's message hugely over-complicates this simple
> concept, and ends up concluding, as such messages so often do, that

Its not complicated. Its standard practice today for a number of services. At
the easiest level its service pings from multiple networks up through
sophisticated traffic flow and metric analysis (in the Web sector this is a
very big sub-industry)

> we should do nothing. Sorry, Ed, not having that. As a compromise,
> I am perfectly happy for _you_ to do nothing :-)

Collecting data makes a lot of sense.. Sure we do it.. (and even use it in our
models).. but anything short of a kind of global reference monitoring service
I've suggested above..... I'm not sure it belongs anywhere other than in our
internal monitoring databases..

>
> On 14 April 2010 01:18, Peter Noerr <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Back to the original suggestion, after the rather ironic detour this
thread took...
> >
> > Such numbers would be useful to us as a fed search service. We actually
maintain this sort of data for all the Sources we connect to, by means of an
active checking program of our own, so it would not add greatly to our own
practices, but it would be useful to have the site's own idea of how often it
thought it was available, and it would be useful to the vast majority of
systems which had no justification to set up monitoring programs.
> >
> > Which leads to the question of what this "percentage reliability" is
actually measuring and how? The aforementioned power outage and servers
playing doorstops obviously counts as "unavailable", but what if they were
still happily running on their (long life) UPS, while the router was down?
From the outside world's point of view both are bad, but how does the server
check itself from outside? And is this a time average, a moving average, a
snapshot, based on number of tries irrespective of time, or just whatever the
server thinks is a good idea (better than nothing - probably)?
> >
> > Peter



--

Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
Basis Systeme netzwerk, Munich Ges. des buergerl. Rechts
http://www.nonmonotonic.net
Umsatz-St-ID: DE130492967

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2017
October 2016
July 2016
August 2014
February 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
February 2013
January 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
January 2012
October 2011
May 2011
April 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager