LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for QSERV-L Archives


QSERV-L Archives

QSERV-L Archives


QSERV-L@LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

QSERV-L Home

QSERV-L Home

QSERV-L  March 2013

QSERV-L March 2013

Subject:

Re: how about using consecutive port numbers?

From:

Fabrice Jammes <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

General discussion for qserv (LSST prototype baseline catalog)

Date:

Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:02:09 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (65 lines)

Hello Jacek,

Thanks for this proposal, I thinks it would be an excellent idea and 
would ease continuous integration of Qserv.

Tests are now working quite well but i still need to merge branch 2014 
in the master branch.
I will do it as soon as it is integrated well with unittest and scons. 
Some jobs still remains.

Then you proposal could be done quite easily, maybe in a new ticket ?

W13 data are loaded in branch 2014 (with 10 stripes and substripes we 
only get one chunk, could Douglas please gave us the partitioning 
parameters neede to get 2 chunks), and some queries success,
but we still have to do some job to automated "partitionned" views 
creation. This will be done in the W13 loading associated ticket.
We have not studied very well meta-data integration but we will do that 
as soon as possible, we're very interested.

Do we have a meeting tomorow ? Next week would be better for us.

Thanks in advance for your answer,

Fabrice



On 03/27/2013 05:30 AM, Jacek Becla wrote:
> How about using adjacent numbers for ports for a given
> qserv installation. I am looking at an installation on
> lsst-db2 (W13_1K), and it is using:
>
> 7123 mysql
> 5040 proxy
> 2094 xrootd
> 2131 xrootd manager
>
> How about if we required that qserv needs say 10 adjacent
> port numbers (just to be safe), and we could fix the
> numbers to daemons, something like
>
> xxx1 mysql
> xxx2 proxy
> xxx3 xrootd
> xxx4 xrootd manager
>
> If we did that, we could even get away with defining
> just one "base" number somewhere in a central config
> file, and all other ports could be automatically derived.
>
> Jacek
>
> ########################################################################
> Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
>
> To unsubscribe from the QSERV-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=QSERV-L&A=1

########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the QSERV-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=QSERV-L&A=1

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

March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
August 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager

Privacy Notice, Security Notice and Terms of Use