Comments for Toolserver Journal

Comment on Wikimedia Foundation Grants $40,000 to the Toolserver by Pietrodn

Pietrodn — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:56:46 +0000

Wonderful! This will dramatically improve our Toolserver experience.

Comment on Wherein msnbot behaves badly, and is banished by OverlordQ

OverlordQ — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 02:47:12 +0000

I mailed them back in 2005 about this same thing and commented “Blocked your netrange” they replied with “OMGPLZNO, try robots.txt” Tried that, their FAQ (at that time) said they rechecked robots.txt every day, but 3 days later, they were still hammering away so I blocked them outright with IPTables.

Comment on Faster, Better, Stronger by alnokta

alnokta — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:53:12 +0000

Great! go WMDL!.

Comment on Wherein the Toolserver journal is reborn in a much less annoying fashion by river

river — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:39:17 +0000

It does show on the front page (under the post title), but it *doesn’t* show on the comment page, for some reason. It might be a problem with the skin…

Comment on Wherein the Toolserver journal is reborn in a much less annoying fashion by Sam Korn

Sam Korn — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:35:33 +0000

This looks good :-)

The only thing I notice is that there is no way to see who made the posts. Interestingly, this does show up on the Planet…

Comment on Wherein a new server is delivered to the wrong place, but then remains there by Darkoneko

Darkoneko — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 04:30:33 +0000

What about a zone for bots that don’t need any mySQL access ?
since that would still pose problems for the DNS, maybe as an independant thing… ? (I think there’s a distinct account for the stable toolserver, so why not for this one too)

Comment on Wherein a new server is delivered to the wrong place, but then remains there by River Tarnell

River Tarnell — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:15:31 +0000

Well, this is referring to the new hardware that will arrive in February. I don’t think putting bots on this server would be a good idea; if we need more userland servers, they should be added to the normal cluster. (Doing NFS, MySQL etc. over a transatlantic link is not going to result in good performance.)

Comment on On tools and memory use by Platonides

Platonides — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 20:50:49 +0000

I have a linking bot working with less than 2Mb (and still most of it is probably the runtime). It’s true that it’s not in java but… How did they code it so badly to need 100Mb??

Comment on On tools and memory use by Darkoneko

Darkoneko — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:27:48 +0000

Well, I never said they were not useful :)
I don’t think we need more than 2 bots starting from each major wiki. but there’s no organisation.

Comment on On tools and memory use by Tim Landscheidt

Tim Landscheidt — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:35:50 +0000

I’m still not convinced :-). A thoughtfully engineered single bot should consume considerably less ressources than a bunch of not synchronized ones. But as long as RAM and CPU speed are cheap … :-)