On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Marco A. Calamari <marcoc1 at dada.it> wrote: > On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 14:33 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: >> On Saturday 03 July 2010 23:50:00 Evan Daniel wrote: >> > On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Marco A. Calamari <marcoc1 at dada.it> >> wrote: > >> > Huh? ?So don't upgrade until the insert finishes, or use persistent >> > inserts. ?The last one wasn't mandatory for a week, iirc. >> >> Agreed, that doesn't make any sense: As long as an insert is >> persistent it should finish the insert even after a restart with a new >> build. >> >> So please explain *EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED*, instead of just vaguely >> grumbling without giving us enough information to debug! > > Please do not become nervous and do not scream. > > I'm inserting a rather big site (over 20000 parts) using > ?jSite, with an effective bandwidth of 0.3 KB/sec (calculated > ?by jSite. The site usually insert in 4-7 days. > No bug at all, but if an update become mandatory in less days > ?that the site inserts, the jSite insert obviously fail. > > I do not know how insert sites in other ways; persistent insert > ?are only for files, isn't it? > > I'm not grumbling. ?Peace. ? Marco
Persistent inserts can be used for any kind of insert, including both sites and single files. I use persistent inserts via a small shell script and FCP to insert my network size stats site, for example. The inserting program just needs to set the appropriate options. In general if you're inserting a site that large, you should at least consider inserting the large files individually and then linking to them from the main site. I'm assuming this isn't all *new* data? If most of the insert remains unchanged, you could save yourself a lot of time this way. Anyway, support for persistent inserts in jSite would obviously be helpful here. Evan Daniel
