Forums migration
-
Last nite, we migrated machines from 162.243.36.100 to 162.243.208.23, and then kicked off the CS import job. I'm not sure if it's still running, but it's expected to take 17+ hours. I'll check with @InedoJohn a little later this morning, but for now, this is the new server.
If the CS script really messes things up, then we'll roll back to the snapshot we took Friday nite, before putting the site in read only.
// oh, and I can't change the banner on the old site, since I'm not logged in and its in read only; hopefully DNS will update and no one will see 162.243.36.100 when they try to go to what..
-
For Curiosity's sake (and because i'm a noisy fox with bots) did you happen to check the "set up IPV6 for me" button when you created the new droplet?
She asks innocently with no malice aforethought.
-
Aaaaaaah crap. No. I don't think so.
The migration was like 1000 times harder than we expected, between getting docker working, script fixed, figuring out backups, restores, all that rubbish.
-
okay then.
worth a shot.
time to actually write up that documentation for how to enable it after and send it your way then. ;-)
that's what i get for trying to be lazy.
-
The migration was like 1000 times harder than we expected, between getting docker working
Liez! Discodevs told me it was easy and that my inability to get Discourse running myself (within reasonable time) was my own damned incompentence!
-
-
that's what i get for trying to be lazy.
Isn't it normally the dog you jump over that's lazy?
-
the rhyme says the fox is quick, it says nothing about the laziness or lack there of of the fox.
maybe the fox was running away from a different dog? or maybe it was chasing a chicken?
did you ever think of that? you speciesist!
</blakeyrant>
-
$ man easy No manual entry for easyHuh. I guess I cannot, in good conscience, contest that point.
-
That word does not mean what you think it means when talking about Linux.
well...... I don't share that opinion, but then i've been using linux for 12 years now.
i'm sure 12 years ago i would have agreed though!
-
$ woman
No command 'woman' found, did you mean:
Command 'wsman' from package 'wsmancli' (universe)
woman: command not foundSexist.
-
There's never an easy setting there anyway so I didn't even bother trying.
-
well...... I don't share that opinion, but then i've been using linux for 12 years now.
Having recently gotten back into Linux a little for work I'm going to have to say it's still fairly-well deserved. Compare Tomcat administration to IIS, for example.
By way of credentials I used mh--the commandline tool--for mail, 25 years ago.
-
well, yes, as i alluded to in my second paragraph there. ;-P
it does have a reputation for being hard to get into, but i think it's well worth the effort.
YMMV
-
Compare Tomcat administration to IIS, for example.
:goalpost:
That's software, not OS. Also, Tomcat? Out of all things? Ugh. That's one of the worst pieces of software I ever had a misfortune of using.
I will now shut up on the subject because I really don't feel like discussing this shit. But this flamebait was so bad I couldn't leave it alone. Even though I knew it was flamebait. At least you could've chosen something like nginx that (AFAIK) doesn't have a Windows port, you know?
-
Well, Linux and Tomcat are free, the "full" edition of the latest Windows Server costs $6,155. Some people don't want to admit that, but it really is hard to get good developers when you have no reliable source of income other than donations.
-
it really is hard to get good developers when you have no reliable source of income other than donations.
Red Hat is a charity now?
-
That word does not mean what you think it means when talking about Linux.
Oh well, good thing you didn't pick a forum product that only works on that shitty-ass OS then.
-
it's not exactly production quality, but then neither is
IIStomcat
-
The note's gone… has the import finished successfully then?
-
Went searching for something epic...
Found nothing :(
-
-
Well, Linux and Tomcat are free, the "full" edition of the latest Windows Server costs $6,155
What do you mean "full"? Standard and Datacenter offer the same features, and standard can be licensed for under $900 based on the last time I did pricing. The only difference between the two is the number of virtual machines that can be hosted under the license. Standard is limited to 2 client VMs and Datacenter is unlimited. So unless you are planning to use Hyper-V and are setting up several VMs, you can get a "full" Windows server OS for about 1/7 of what you are claiming. If you are looking to use Hyper-V and set up several CMs, then the price you quoted may end up being your total OS cost.
-
maybe the fox was running away from a different dog? or maybe it was chasing a chicken?
I always envisioned the jump-over as a variant of running circles around that lazy dog.
-
If you are looking to use Hyper-V and set up several CMs, then the price you quoted may end up being your total OS cost.
If you are looking at Hyper-V for more then an occasional usage then chances are it is to host Windows servers run Windows based applications to serve Windows clients. Those servers and clients might require other MS products. So you might be better looking for packaged deals instead of buying per server licenses.
-
If you are looking at Hyper-V for more then an occasional usage then chances are it is to host Windows servers run Windows based applications to serve Windows clients. Those servers and clients might require other MS products. So you might be better looking for packaged deals instead of buying per server licenses.
But if you need multiple virtual servers - say 12 - and Hyper-V is your hypervisor of choice, then you buy one Datacenter license and you're set. No additional OS licenses required because the datacenter license lets you apply the license to the host machine and all of its VMs. Bundling probably won't save you much.
-
Well, Linux and Tomcat are free, the "full" edition of the latest Windows Server costs $6,155.
Speaking of :goalpost:. You don't need "full" Windows Server for, say, a web or application server.
I like Linux, mostly. But doing stuff with it is a PITA in a lot of ways compared to Windows.
-
it's not exactly production quality, but then neither is tomcat
Yeah, well, that doesn't help me, since I have to use tomcat.
-
So unless you are planning to use Hyper-V and are setting up several VMs, you can get a "full" Windows server OS for about 1/7 of what you are claiming.
People love to make that comparison when they don't have something better to argue about.
A couple of years ago I asked about an new server for our office. The IT guy said "oh, that'd cost about 15K" because he just read the price off the highest configuration of Dell's rackmounts. My office doesn't need a 16-core E7 with 192GB of RAM and a petabyte disk array. A little playing with the product configurator and I had a $3000 quote including OS and CALs, which was going to be plenty to host half-a-dozen databases.
-
No additional OS licenses required because the datacenter license lets you apply the license to the host machine and all of its VMs.
I wish Windows Pro would let you use the host OS in a Hyper-V VM or two. That would make my life easier.
-
Bundling probably won't save you much.
If > 12 and that is your only concern then yes. But this MS gives you this because of the simple fact that people who have an interest at running > 12 virtual MS servers on Hyper-V might have more then those 12 Windows servers, no? I mean ... 12 servers is not gigantic but you won't be running SBS on it won't you?
-
Most likely. But my point is: you only need datacenter if you are setting up a virtual farm. Otherwise, just get standard and save yourself over $5k.
-
just get standard and save yourself over $5k.
Or web and save even more (but there might be some limitations)
-
Or web and save even more (but there might be some limitations)
I thought we were talking about cases when you needed the full set of features. In that case, web is a no go.
-
Who is this "Discourse Team" person? Is it @wood?
-
Guessing it's
From: team@discourse.org. Several of them have access to the account.
-
Migrations are hairy.
I always recommend archiving the old content (leaving it as static HTML, which is a lot harder than you might think) and starting fresh if you can. That way nothing is lost.
Ironically the more and older and larger the content is, the stronger the argument in favor of archive and start anew. For smaller sites, less inertia, less old obsolete content.
-
I thought we were talking about cases when you needed the full set of features.
We where? Then forget I mentioned it
forget ...
-
-
```text
$ man easy
No manual entry for easyHuh. I guess I cannot, in good conscience, contest that point.</blockquote> Of course not. If someone would have to enter it manually, it would not be easy.
-
Paging @Groaner...
Edit: Wait, did this just send him a notification? Because the link works! But... but I tried to avoid it! Damned Discourse... Sorry if it pinged you Groaner.
