On 2/5/07, Jerome Flesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I don't see why this is a problem; he has to parse it when he submits
> > > the request in the first place, and/or when he connects to the global
> > > queue after starting up, so the code is only slightly different for
> > > updating it.
>
> > I don't see why this is a problem; he has to parse it when he submits
> > the request in the first place, and/or when he connects to the global
> > queue after starting up, so the code is only slightly different for
> > updating it.
>
> Just for the records: the difference is that in the first
nning that the PRR is sent *after* the
GetFailed though.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/b33070fa/attachment.pgp>
her client authors would be useful. Jflesh?
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/84f1aaf8/attachment.pgp>
t part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/af8f4c51/attachment.pgp>
to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor clients
> running...
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.or
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 10:44:30AM -0500, Chris Carlin wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > Interesting. Somebody needs to talk to the BDB folk, to get an idea what
> > is a reasonable footprint.
>
> What, at this point, are the questions on the table? In my casual
> skimming of the threads under
On 2/5/07, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote:
> On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 01:29:22PM +0100, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote:
> > > On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, bbackde at googlemail.com
> > > > wrote:
> >
* Jano [2007-02-05 17:36:04]:
> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
>
> > * Jano [2007-02-05
> > 16:42:13]:
> >
> >> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
> >>
> >> > * Jano [2007-02-05
> >> > 16:30:39]:
> >> >
> >> >> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > * Jano
> >> >> > [
Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
> * Jano [2007-02-05
> 16:42:13]:
>
>> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
>>
>> > * Jano [2007-02-05
>> > 16:30:39]:
>> >
>> >> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > * Jano
>> >> > [2007-02-05 15:46:09]:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Jano wrote:
>> >> >>
* Jano [2007-02-05 16:42:13]:
> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
>
> > * Jano [2007-02-05
> > 16:30:39]:
> >
> >> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
> >>
> >> > * Jano [2007-02-05
> >> > 15:46:09]:
> >> >
> >> >> Jano wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node
Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
> * Jano [2007-02-05
> 16:30:39]:
>
>> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
>>
>> > * Jano [2007-02-05
>> > 15:46:09]:
>> >
>> >> Jano wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor
>> >> > clients running...
>> >>
>
* Jano [2007-02-05 16:30:39]:
> Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
>
> > * Jano [2007-02-05
> > 15:46:09]:
> >
> >> Jano wrote:
> >>
> >> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor
> >> > clients running...
> >>
> >> (Actually what I have done is to put all my inser
Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote:
> * Jano [2007-02-05
> 15:46:09]:
>
>> Jano wrote:
>>
>> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor
>> > clients running...
>>
>> (Actually what I have done is to put all my inserts in "will never
>> finish". Should this cease all lo
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> The JVM only uses one core for garbage collection. Which is all that is
> happening.
I see. And I've read that from java1.3 onwards java threads are proper linux
threads.
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 03:40:27PM +0100, Jano wrote:
>> Jano wrote:
>>
>> Seeing this other gra
* Jano [2007-02-05 15:46:09]:
> Jano wrote:
>
> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor clients
> > running...
>
> (Actually what I have done is to put all my inserts in "will never finish".
> Should this cease all local insertion activity, Toad?)
No.
Jano wrote:
> I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor clients
> running...
(Actually what I have done is to put all my inserts in "will never finish".
Should this cease all local insertion activity, Toad?)
oing to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor clients
running...
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: death96m.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 25025 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/38797060/attachment.gif>
ue, and I had
around 50 insertions running. My cpu is a dual core 2.8GHz one.
I'm running now with 96m to see what happens...
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: death.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 27642 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/e093f0f0/attachment.gif>
On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 01:29:22PM +0100, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote:
> > On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote:
> > > > If FCP2 want to provide clients an easy access, then the
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> [B [I [C [[B almost certainly mean byte[], int[], char[], byte[][].
Good to know.
> I didn't get jmap to work (maybe because I was using java 5), but I did
> do some invasive profiling (with stack traces), and used that to
> identify and eliminate some high-churn object
Sorry for the large attachment, I thought I was replying off-list.
Cheers,
Michael
--
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: reordering.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 107648 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/0a3f4573/attachment.pdf>
On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote:
> > If FCP2 want to provide clients an easy access, then the following
> > changes are needed:
> >
> > Answer to a ModifyPersistentRequest should not be a new
> > Persistent with all val
means.
> > >
> > > Please discuss this, and with your answer provide an explanation WHY
> > > you recommendation is better then the given ones, thanks.
> > >
> > > rgds, bback.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/7bf21d0f/attachment.pgp>
pport.LRUQueue$QItem
> >>
> >> Total instances pending finalization: 0
> >>
> >> From these numbers it seems that sleepycat is notably leaking memory (the
> >> LN objects). Someone familiar with DBD could perhaps pinpoint seeing this
> >> if this
> > I don't see why this is a problem; he has to parse it when he submits
> > the request in the first place, and/or when he connects to the global
> > queue after starting up, so the code is only slightly different for
> > updating it.
>
> Just for the records: the difference is that in the first
2-05 11:52:15 UTC (rev 11679)
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> package sim.messages;
> -import sim.generators.Client;
> +import sim.clients.Client;
>
> public class ChkInsert extends Search
> {
>
> Modified: trunk/apps/load-balancing-sims/phase7/sim/messages/Search.java
> ===
> --- trunk/apps/load-balancing-sims/phase7/sim/messages/Search.java
> 2007-02-05 00:36:43 UTC (rev 11678)
> +++ trunk/apps/load-balancing-sims/phase7/sim/messages/Search.java
> 2007-02-05 11:52:15 UTC (rev 11679)
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> package sim.messages;
> -import sim.generators.Client;
> +import sim.clients.Client;
>
> public class Search extends Message
> {
>
> Modified: trunk/apps/load-balancing-sims/phase7/sim/messages/SskInsert.java
> ===
> --- trunk/apps/load-balancing-sims/phase7/sim/messages/SskInsert.java
> 2007-02-05 00:36:43 UTC (rev 11678)
> +++ trunk/apps/load-balancing-sims/phase7/sim/messages/SskInsert.java
> 2007-02-05 11:52:15 UTC (rev 11679)
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> package sim.messages;
> -import sim.generators.Client;
> +import sim.clients.Client;
>
> public class SskInsert extends Search
> {
>
> ___
> cvs mailing list
> cvs at freenetproject.org
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cvs
>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/014645c0/attachment.pgp>
bin/mailman/listinfo/cvs
>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/49665a54/attachment.pgp>
i. Existing clients are not affected.
> > >
> > > Please discuss this, and with your answer provide an explanation WHY
> > > you recommendation is better then the given ones, thanks.
> > >
> > > rgds, bback.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/3f8ffdd1/attachment.pgp>
e.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/249ebae3/attachment.pgp>
g list
> > Devl at freenetproject.org
> > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> >
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/e946aa00/attachment.pgp>
or less).
>
> ___
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/5c44ae68/attachment.pgp>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070205/65396cbd/attachment.pgp>
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 06:51:11PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Or a GetFailed with Removed=true.
>
> Finally not a good idea: if a request was SUCCESSFUL and then it is
> removed from the queue, why should the node send a GetFailed with
> Removed=true? We need a message Per
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 02:52:16PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > I don't see why this is a problem; he has to parse it when he submits
> > the request in the first place, and/or when he connects to the global
> > queue after starting up, so the code is only slightly different for
> > upda
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 04:42:13PM +0100, Jano wrote:
> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
>
> > It depends on the scheduler policy you've choosen. If you are using the
> > default (HARD) then yes.
>
> Ok.
>
> A basic question in this leak hunt: is the insertion process designed to use
> consta
The JVM only uses one core for garbage collection. Which is all that is
happening.
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 03:40:27PM +0100, Jano wrote:
> Jano wrote:
>
> Seeing this other graph of the 96m node, it seems that what happened is that
> the graphs didn't had enough resolution. This other node has di
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 10:44:30AM -0500, Chris Carlin wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > Interesting. Somebody needs to talk to the BDB folk, to get an idea what
> > is a reasonable footprint.
>
> What, at this point, are the questions on the table? In my casual
> skimming of the threads under
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> Interesting. Somebody needs to talk to the BDB folk, to get an idea what
> is a reasonable footprint.
What, at this point, are the questions on the table? In my casual
skimming of the threads under this subject it seems to have gotten
rather muddled. I'd be happy to bri
On 2/5/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 01:29:22PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, [EMA
* Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05 17:36:04]:
> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
>
> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> > 16:42:13]:
> >
> >> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
> >>
> >> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> >> > 16:30:39]:
> >> >
> >> >> Florent Daignière
Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
> * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> 16:42:13]:
>
>> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
>>
>> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
>> > 16:30:39]:
>> >
>> >> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> > [200
* Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05 16:42:13]:
> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
>
> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> > 16:30:39]:
> >
> >> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
> >>
> >> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> >> > 15:46:09]:
> >> >
> >> >> Jano wrote:
> >>
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> Interesting. Somebody needs to talk to the BDB folk, to get an idea what
> is a reasonable footprint.
What, at this point, are the questions on the table? In my casual
skimming of the threads under this subject it seems to have gotten
rather muddled. I'd be happy to bri
Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
> * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> 16:30:39]:
>
>> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
>>
>> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
>> > 15:46:09]:
>> >
>> >> Jano wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions n
* Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05 16:30:39]:
> Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
>
> > * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> > 15:46:09]:
> >
> >> Jano wrote:
> >>
> >> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor
> >> > clients running...
> >>
> >> (Actually w
Florent Daignière (NextGen$) wrote:
> * Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05
> 15:46:09]:
>
>> Jano wrote:
>>
>> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor
>> > clients running...
>>
>> (Actually what I have done is to put all my inserts in "will never
>> finish". Shoul
* Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-05 15:46:09]:
> Jano wrote:
>
> > I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor clients
> > running...
>
> (Actually what I have done is to put all my inserts in "will never finish".
> Should this cease all local insertion activity, Toad?)
Jano wrote:
> I'm going to test now a standard 128m node with no insertions nor clients
> running...
(Actually what I have done is to put all my inserts in "will never finish".
Should this cease all local insertion activity, Toad?)
___
Devl mailing lis
Jano wrote:
> Jano wrote:
>
>> Matthew Toseland wrote:
>>
>>> [B [I [C [[B almost certainly mean byte[], int[], char[], byte[][].
>>
>> Good to know.
>>
>>> I didn't get jmap to work (maybe because I was using java 5), but I did
>>> do some invasive profiling (with stack traces), and used that
Jano wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
>
>> [B [I [C [[B almost certainly mean byte[], int[], char[], byte[][].
>
> Good to know.
>
>> I didn't get jmap to work (maybe because I was using java 5), but I did
>> do some invasive profiling (with stack traces), and used that to
>> identify and elimi
On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 01:29:22PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > If FCP2 want to provide clients an
Sorry for the large attachment, I thought I was replying off-list.
Cheers,
Michael
___
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 01:29:22PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > If FCP2 want to provide clients an easy access, then the following
> > > changes are needed:
> > >
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 01:42:00PM +0100, Jano wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
>
> > [B [I [C [[B almost certainly mean byte[], int[], char[], byte[][].
>
> Good to know.
>
> > I didn't get jmap to work (maybe because I was using java 5), but I did
> > do some invasive profiling (with stack tra
What's going on with the sendAck(int) -> send(int)?
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 11:52:16AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: mrogers
> Date: 2007-02-05 11:52:15 + (Mon, 05 Feb 2007)
> New Revision: 11679
>
> Modified:
>trunk/apps/load-balancing-sims/phase7/sim/Node.java
>trunk/app
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> [B [I [C [[B almost certainly mean byte[], int[], char[], byte[][].
Good to know.
> I didn't get jmap to work (maybe because I was using java 5), but I did
> do some invasive profiling (with stack traces), and used that to
> identify and eliminate some high-churn object
On 2/5/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > If FCP2 want to provide clients an easy access, then the following
> > changes are needed:
> >
> > Answer to a ModifyPersistentRequest should not be a new
> > Persistent w
Nice catch! Thanks!
On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 02:41:35PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: dbkr
> Date: 2007-02-04 14:41:35 + (Sun, 04 Feb 2007)
> New Revision: 11668
>
> Modified:
>trunk/freenet/src/freenet/crypt/RijndaelPCFBMode.java
> Log:
> Fix to r.11663 (RijndaelPCFBMode subcl
On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 10:46:15PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 2/4/07, Jerome Flesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If FCP2 want to provide clients an easy access, then the following
> > > changes are needed:
> > >
> > > Answer to a ModifyPersistentRequest should not be a new
> > > Persi
On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 09:38:47PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If FCP2 want to provide clients an easy access, then the following
> changes are needed:
>
> Answer to a ModifyPersistentRequest should not be a new
> Persistent with all values, but a ModifiedPersistentRequest
> message with onl
On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 11:52:37PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This new flag introduces more ambiguousness for clients.
>
> I think it should either be a GetFailed with reason=Removed (I don't
> like this one because the get didn't actually fail, but this depends
> on the definition of 'fail
[B [I [C [[B almost certainly mean byte[], int[], char[], byte[][].
I didn't get jmap to work (maybe because I was using java 5), but I did
do some invasive profiling (with stack traces), and used that to
identify and eliminate some high-churn objects; if the current problem is
that too much garba
At the moment the priority is the CPU/memory performance issues which
have been reported fairly widely. A big part of this comes down to
object churn, and I have made significant progress on this on Saturday.
But I seem to have broken something fairly major in the process. I will
therefore fix this
65 matches
Mail list logo
