From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JJJCP-0006s0-Kp for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:54:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D44DE03BC; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:54:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.156]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0997E03BC for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:54:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e21so1467097fga.14 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:54:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.134.2 with SMTP id h2mr6488755hud.77.1201485250793; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:54:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.46.19 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:54:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:54:10 -0800 From: "Alec Warner" Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] archives.gentoo.org linking brokenness In-Reply-To: <1201483896.6479.48.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080127094946.GA20263@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net> <1201483896.6479.48.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2e228126897752fa X-Archives-Salt: 0e404d3e-4371-4e0b-8888-318f28381960 X-Archives-Hash: 4cd3758eede584ae573b238975dcc924 On 1/27/08, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 01:49 -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > sequential numbers), but it will be a day or two - restoring the old > > ones is not possible at all. > > Umm... OK. What's the new format? Do we just have to go an manually > change every single link we've ever made to anything on archives? How > are we going to find the articles if the old links don't work? > So slight postmortem: The url per e-mail depended on the order of processing for messages: the first message got 1, the second got 2 and so forth. The upgrade ruined that database. To prevent this in the future, Robin created a scheme that is not dependent on the order of processing (which is harder that it sounds as we discussed on -infra last night). We don't have a mapping from old e-mails to new ones. If you know what the title was you can probably fish the message out of the archives; otherwise you are probably SOL. The bonus out of all this is that the new storage format could get destroyed and we wouldn't have this problem (archives would just be down for two days while infra regenerates the indexes. -Alec -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list