2022-01-07 - Sys Ops & Management SIG Agenda and Notes

2022-01-07 - Sys Ops & Management SIG Agenda and Notes

Date

Jan 7, 2022

Attendees

@Ingolf Kuss , @Tod Olson , @Ian Walls , @Eric Luhrs , @jpnelson , @Brandon Tharp , @Chris Rutledge , @jroot (Unlicensed) , @Hkaplanian 

Meeting Link

  •  https://zoom.us/j/591934220

  • Password: folio-lsp

Goals

Discussion items

Time

Item

Who

Notes

 

Note taker

 

Ian (thank you)

 

Define meeting schedule (for this year)

 

  • Do we want to meet semi-weekly ? 

    • how much synchronous business do we need to do?  perhaps doing a beginning-of-year planning session or two to get our goals for 2022.

    • make the above our first agenda item, and meet next week

    • we'll meet when Ingolf sends an invite

    • Ingolf will send either an inivtation or a cancellation each Thursday until 2 PM EST.

    • If Ingolf has sent nothing until Thursday 2 PM he is probably on holiday (he will of course announce his holidays before !!!) or ill. In this case, there will be no meeting, unless someone else sends out an invitation.

  • Do we want to reserve the weekly meeting spot and cancel if there are no topics ? 

    • please hold this timeslot weekly for Jan; will cancel if nothing on the schedule

  • Shall calendar events be sent once for the whole year (Jan-Dec) ? 

    • yes. Ingolf will send calendar events for every week of the calendar year (52 events).

 

Provide input for TC Strategic Objectives : Document library requirements for stability

 

  • Clearly document the library requirements for stability (Mean Time Between Failures [MTBF], Mean Time To Repair [MTTR])  and secure realization

As in: TC Strategic Objectives TC comments on CC designation of leading council for FOLIO Vision, Strategic Objectives and Initiatives for PC and TC usage - Google Docs

Bullet Point #6 of Strategic Initiatives for near-term.

TC sees this as more of a SysOps issue than a TC issue; this is a Service Level Agreement, rather than a Product feature/goal.  Should this goal be removed, or can it be rewritten in a way that can be better handled the TC?

  • this would be the group to define requirements

  • this is system dependent, both in terms of system resources as well as anticipated system usage

  • performance metrics are separate from MTBF and MTTR

  • what are the minimum goals ?

  • should this requirement just be dropped?

    • it's important, and the TC is best equipped to manage it

    • should probably be rewritten without MTBF and MTTR, but still capturing 'reliability' concept

    • more time may be required to live with FOLIO in production in order to understand reasonable metrics

  • Hosting providers identify issues with hosting FOLIO that require development resources to resolve, and report to TC

 

Topics for next week

 

  • What do we want to achieve this year ?

  • platform-minimum (Ian & Jeremy)

    • encourage modularity and clean dependencies (moving towards independently-installable Apps)

    • reduce dependence single-server install method

      • build towards docker-compose or helm deployment without manual intervention

      • have a FOLIO that can be deployed on commodity hardware (for developers)

    • not a point to sell to librarians; audiences: vendors, developers, possibly folks outside the library world ....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Action items