Re: [freenet-support] java.lang.OutOfMemoryError
Me too. What I did was this (on Win32 that is): change to freenet directory and type: java -Xms64m -Xmx256m -jar freenet.jar The bad thing about this is you don't get the cute little bunny icon in your system tray and you have a console stuck in your task bar all the time. I didn't try javaw because I need the console to kill freenet (^C), otherwise I'd have to kill it through the task manager, which I assume would be worse :) - Original Message - From: Shawn Yarbrough [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 9:00 PM Subject: [freenet-support] java.lang.OutOfMemoryError My dedicated Freenet node won't start. I stopped it because the load was only 20% (I'm used to around 80% load, 24 hours a day). It was working fine 12 hours ago as far as I could tell from :. I'm seeing: Exception in thread main java.lang.OutOfMemoryError in the bash shell that I run my node from. This occurs after loading routing table in freenet.log, and then the node crashes. This node is the latest version and has been around since the stable release. Uptime was over five days. It has about 19 GB in it's datastore. System is Athlon 1333 mhz, Debian GNU/Linux 3.0, Linux kernel 2.2.20, Sun Java, 768 MB RAM, 2 GB swap, no swap being used. Any suggestions what could be wrong? I tried renaming the ls* and rt* files but that had no effect so I put them back. I can provide more info/logs/testing but I don't currently have time to debug any code myself. Shawn Yarbrough [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
[freenet-support] Send command line options through the wrapper
Is there any way to send command line options to thecommand line through the wrapper on a winxp system? I'm having problems with java.lang.outOfMemory when starting my node. I've resorted to running freenet by just doingjava -Xms64m -Xmx256m -jar freenet.jar but I miss the little rabbit icon, and the cmd box is ugly :) Also, is there a better way than ^C to shutdown freenet when running it like this?
Re: [freenet-support] Keep up the good work, but ...
I tried adding publicNode and I couldn't see any difference. The node is running under windows XP. Both computers have valid internet addresses. Both computers are on the same subnet. The node is configured to allow all IP addresses mainport access, however my firewall only permits the two computers to access fproxy or fcp. However, with the latest release it is alot better, but you still sometimes you have to wait up to a minute for fproxy to respond. Localhost always seems fast, so why not have an option that allows all FCP and FProxy access to be treated like localhost. Right now, FCP and FProxy access from non-local host addresses ARE treated differently. Just give us the option to turn that behaviour off. I've asked this a couple times before and I was told to use software like squid, putty, etc. But I want to use mozilla and setting up squid on win xp is non trivial, not to mention my poor server is overloaded right now. - Original Message - From: Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 3:49 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Keep up the good work, but ... Great job, freenet is getting much better. However, fproxy access for non localhost addresses is still slow if you are running a busy permanent node. Non-localhost addresses? LAN addresses, you mean, e.g. 10.x.x.x 192.168.x.x etc? Or do you mean you are trying to access the node over the internet? In this case, I recommend you use an SSL wrapper program, you get encryption and the node sees local connections. Oh, and set publicNode=true in your freenet.conf, if other people can access it, this disables some potentially damaging pages. ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
[freenet-support] Keep up the good work, but ...
Great job, freenet is getting much better. However, fproxy access for non localhost addresses is still slow if you are running a busy permanent node.
[freenet-support] latest build - good work!
Well, after watching my node for a while, I can report with some confidence that the latest stable build of freenet is performing much better. My node has been running almost 24 hours and it's not stuck at 100% cpu constantly, although the general trend is for cpu usage to slowly increase. I have seen this kind of behaviour in other complex java apps that run for long periods of time, so it may be a jvm issue. Even better though is the lack of dead connections. For as long as I can recall, my firewall would report more and more dead connections (connections lasting more than 8 hours with little data sent) the longer the node ran. restarting my node would clear these connections out. It's good to see that this bug has been resolved. I recommend to everyone to update to the latest stable snapshot! I'm looking forward to further improvments in performance so I can handle more traffic. Kudos to the development team!
Re: [freenet-support] Tired of my complaining yet? If not, read!
My IP address are both routeable and on the same subnet. I do not believe that bandwidth limiting is the major cause. Something else is slowing fproxy down (for non localhost addresses) because I get the slowdown no matter how I set the bandwidth limiter. What I would like is for all FCP and FProxy connections to be treaty EXACTLY as if they are from local host no matter what. If people need to control access this can be done with a firewall. ssh tunneling is no solution for windows users, unless someone out there knows how this could be done in windows. - Original Message - From: Roger Hayter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Tired of my complaining yet? If not, read! In message 002201c28492$b6cd6180$4e0d4818@ip78, Robert Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I just want to spout off about my node's performance, or lack of it. I'm running a permanent node on a server that has other things to do besides spend every cpu cycle on a java app. Also, like alot of node operators, I don't use the machine directly, but instead access fproxy and fcp from another machine. Sometimes it can take SEVERAL minutes just to call up the web interface! Even when I do finally get through, alot of content is simply not found, no doubt due to overloaded permanent nodes. Here are some suggestions for the developers: As a matter of interest, our your other machines on private or routeable IP addresses? I gather the bandwidth limits do not now apply to machines on the same private subnet. This does not help those of us using routeable IP addresses, and I wondered if the speed of contacting fproxy was increased in practice. Lynx on the Freenet server certainly seems to work faster, but it is less than useful for graphics, obviously. Transient nodes should be your lowest priority right now. Attention should be shifted to the permanent nodes because the health of the network depends on them. That means that CPU utilization needs to be reduced drastically. Performance for FCP and FProxy need to get the HIGHEST priority when the node is processing. If that means that other transactions have to be put on hold in order to process a local request, then so be it. Permanent node operators should not be penalized for serving the Freenet community. See above, we need to know if bandwidth limiting is a major factor in Fproxy performance. Do you have the strange problem that my permanent node has, that it loses all the contacts from its routeing table because it cannot successfully contact them, although a transient node close by can easily contact the same nodes 50% of the time? If there is a solution to this that does not severely impact on incoming requests (or even if it does!) it would make running a permanent node less frustrating. More should be done to encourage people to run permanent nodes. Requests could be prioritized by each node according to the requesters responsiveness and availability to that node. Of course some minimum level of resources need to be dedicated to slower nodes to prevent the network from fragmenting. To help those who are firewalled or using NAT (who have trouble receiving inbound connections, but not establishing outbound connections), nodes with a permanent IP could also serve as helpers, by listening on behalf of a firewalled or NAT node. This would only be required for establishing connections, NOT for acting as a proxy for the data. Bandwidth requirements would be minor and would allow alot of people to become permanent nodes. Sounds interesting, the firewalled node would maintain a permanent connection to the helper node? -- Roger Hayter ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] windows 0.5.0.4 monolithic installer updated
Excellent! Build 530 CPU usage is WAY down! Great job! Just curious what changed to improve performance? ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] windows 0.5.0.4 monolithic installer updated
Ahhh ... oops! Couple hourse later, freenet is back up to 100% CPU. My excitement was premature :( - Original Message - From: Robert Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 6:54 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] windows 0.5.0.4 monolithic installer updated Excellent! Build 530 CPU usage is WAY down! Great job! Just curious what changed to improve performance? ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
[freenet-support] Tired of my complaining yet? If not, read!
I just want to spout off about my node's performance, or lack of it. I'm running a permanent node on a server that has other things to do besides spend every cpu cycle on a java app. Also, like alot of node operators, I don't use the machine directly, but instead access fproxy and fcp from another machine. Sometimes it can take SEVERAL minutes just to call up the web interface! Even when I do finally get through, alot of content is simply not found, no doubt due to overloadedpermanent nodes. Here are some suggestions for the developers: Transient nodes should be your lowest priority right now. Attention should be shifted to the permanent nodes because the health of the network depends on them. That means that CPU utilization needs to be reduced drastically. Performance for FCP and FProxy need to get the HIGHEST priority when the node is processing. If that means that other transactions have to be put on hold in order to process a local request, then so be it. Permanent node operators should not be penalized for serving the Freenet community. More should be done to encourage people to run permanent nodes. Requests could be prioritized by each node according to the requesters responsiveness and availability to that node. Of course some minimum level of resources need to be dedicated to slower nodes to prevent the network from fragmenting. To help those who are firewalled or using NAT (who have trouble receiving inbound connections, but not establishing outbound connections), nodes with a permanent IP could also serve as helpers, by listening on behalf of a firewalled or NAT node. This would only be required for establishing connections, NOT for acting as a proxy for the data. Bandwidth requirements would be minor and would allow alot of people to become permanent nodes.
[freenet-support] Freenet performance
I think alot of problems with freenet are performance related. The network as a whole would benefit from faster freenet code. Perhaps the developers should consider converting some java methods into native methods. Given the 90/10 rule,a small number of converted methods could yield a huge performance increase. I'm not suggesting that java support should be dropped, but this effort would be paralell to the main java codebase. Unsupported platforms could still use the java methods. This probably wouldn't be a big deal to transients (directly anyway), but it would be a HUGE benefit to the permanent nodes which are the backbone of freenet.
[freenet-support] Request about watchme
If there is going to be another watchme network in the future, I would prefer instead to simply have a seperate watchme java app. that I can run beside freenet that will spy on my node and report back. ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
[freenet-support] FProxy performance.
FProxy performance from a nonlocal host is still terrible, while local host FProxy access is much better. My node is still swamped with connections, although the bandwidth usage is well below my bandwidth limiter settings. I did upgrade to the latest snapshot, but I didn't reinstall with the web installer. Are there some tweaks in the freenet.ini file I'm missing by not using the web installer? ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] Fproxy performance
Then I have a feature request: please take FProxy and FCP off the bandwidth limiter entirely. Or even better, give them their own limiter settings. Also, it seems to me that its just not a bandwidth problem, as the problem occurs when the node is under heavy load (rejecting requests), even though not alot of data is below the bandwidth limit. Anyone know of some good (and FREE) tunneling software for Win XP? - Original Message - From: Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 11:56 AM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Fproxy performance Hmm. Tunnel it - ssh tunnel, or some other way of tunneling it. Then it will look to the node like the fproxy connections are coming from localhost, and they won't be subject to the bandwidth limiter (you have bandwidth limits set, don't you?) ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
[freenet-support] Fproxy performance
Can anything be done to improve FProxy performance? I run a permanent node and access FProxy from another machine on the same subnet. As my node has gotten busier fproxy has gotten slower. I've got my bandwidth limit set at 50,000. If I set it higher my net performance will be unacceptable. Right now, it seems to be a disinsentive to run a permanent node.
[freenet-support] Routing time
I've noticed that my node will reject queries when the routing time goes over 500ms. This seems to happen frequently. I've run a ping command during these periods, and it averages about 35ms, even when the routing time goes into the thousands. I'm running the node on a cable modem (1Mb symetric). So where is the bottleneck? What can I do to reduce the routing time? Or is it beyond my control? Here is the environment info for my node: Available processors: 1 Maximum memory the JVM will allocate: 128 MB Memory currently allocated by the JVM: 37,676 KB Unused allocated memory: 4,232,168 Bytes Memory in use: 34,348,984 Bytes JVM VendorSun Microsystems Inc. JVM Name:Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM JVM Version1.4.1-b21 Operating System: Windows XP OS Version5.1 Total size of the data store: 4,000 MB Free space in the data store: 2,638,072 KB Used space in the data store: 1,457,928 KB Total pooled threads: 150 Available pooled threads: 38 Pooled threads in use: 112
[freenet-support] HELP! Problems running freenet.
I just made a fresh install using the windows installer today. Freenet started, but I got the following errors: I/O error flushing routing table data - java.io.IOException: insufficient storage Failed to load service: nodestatus - freenet.interfaces.ServiceException: No class given I'm running sun java 1.4.1 on windows xp home using Internet Explorer. I can get to the freenet gateway page, but trying to access any any freesites results in a 404 error in my browser.
Re: [freenet-support] HELP! Problems running freenet.
Thanks, now I can try to get pages, but I'm getting route not found. There are other nodes connecting to mine now, so I'll just let my node learn the network on it's own for a while. However, I'm still getting errors: Failed to load service: nodestatus - freenet.interfaces.InterfaceException: No port given for interface I/O error flushing routing table data - java.io.IOException: insufficient storage ^ I'm still getting the above error, although my node does seem to be working as far as I can tell. Also, I want to access freenet from another machine, but I don't want to install another node. What do I need to add to freenet.ini to accomplish this? ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] HELP! Problems running freenet.
Thanks, that did the trick! BTW, where do I apply for the Dumb Ass of the Year award? Seems my problem with the insufficient storage errors was because I was trying to put my data store on my DVD drive, and it was empty to boot! DOH! - Original Message - From: the bishop [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 10:22 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] HELP! Problems running freenet. Failed to load service: nodestatus - freenet.interfaces.InterfaceException: No port given for interface add the following line to your configuration: nodestatus.port=8889 mfg The Bishop ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
