(broken message threading due to digest reply) > From: Timm Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 09 Oct 2002 22:08:47 -0500 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Those "multiple instances" are just threads. Just the JVM alone has a few > threads of its own. 111 sounds a bit excessive, though. >
Well I knew about each java entry in ps being due to a java thread; not a separate instance of java. It just seemed to me that the number that were being generated was excessive. It was not just 111 threads total. It was 111 for each port it was communicating over (111 threads listening on 8888 + 111 threads listening on 8481 + 111 threads for each other node that my node was communicating with) resulting in thousands of java entries in my process list and lsof -i list (a total number of 6937 entries for java in my lsof -i list to be exact). If nothing regarding thread count is set in freenet.conf (which is my case), does this grow without bounds? Should there be so many threads for *each* connection to other nodes? This doesn't seem correct to me. > On Wednesday 09 October 2002 17:53, Michael Wiktowy wrote: > > I have found on recent 0.5 pre-releases (including pre2) that after a > > while (running overnight) the load of the node is pegged at 100% while > > browsing and my system is slowed down dramatically. On running lsof -i > > on my linux system it looks like there are a few separate instances of > > Freenet running on my system. Symptoms of this are many repetitions of a > > java process listening on 8888 and 8481 and my node port 21872 (111 > > repetitions of each LISTEN entry to be exact). I can assure you that I > > did not start up my Freenet node 111 times. I was under the impression > > that there is one LISTENing process per FCP/FNP port that spawns other > > connections on other ports as necessary. > > Mike _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
