[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-29 Thread fish
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > I don't think that the solution to the network overloading is through > > more effective throttling though. An overloaded Freenet does not decay > > gracefully it would seem. A more preferable failure mode would be longer > > waits rather then 99.9

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-29 Thread fish
or is there RNF's everywhere right now? it's making it really hard to insert arg. (congrats to the developers for shipping something, btw :) -fish ___ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/m

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-29 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 07:19:29PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > I've been getting lots of RNFs accompanied by my favorite Freenet error > message, > > Attempts were made to contact 0 nodes. > > * 0 were totally unreachable. > * 0 restarted. > * 0 cleanly rejected. Are you sure you

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Michael Wiktowy
> > > From: > fish > Date: > Tue, 29 Oct 2002 07:55:37 +1100 (EST) > > >On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > >>>I don't think that the solution to the network overloading is through >>>more effective throttling though. An overloaded Freenet does not decay >>>gracefully it would see

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 02:25:44PM -0500, Michael Wiktowy wrote: > > > From: Matthew Toseland > > Date: 28 Oct 2002 17:00:13 + > > > > Well... we've had reports of the development branch causing 100% cpu > > usage and high loads, but on the other hand the load balancing code is > > promising

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Greg Wooledge
Matthew Toseland (toad at amphibian.dyndns.org) wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 07:19:29PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > I've been getting lots of RNFs accompanied by my favorite Freenet error > > message, > > > > Attempts were made to contact 0 nodes. > > > > * 0 were totally unreachab

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: | Well... we've had reports of the development branch causing 100% cpu | usage and high loads, but on the other hand the load balancing code is | promising. If you don't mind living on the edge, upgrade to the | development bran

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Greg Wooledge
I've been getting lots of RNFs accompanied by my favorite Freenet error message, Attempts were made to contact 0 nodes. * 0 were totally unreachable. * 0 restarted. * 0 cleanly rejected. The network load servlet says: * entries: 50 * globalRequestsPerHour: 4426.84 * l

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:44:48PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: |>I have constantly near 100% usage of freds threads (configured to 200), |>13500 requests / hour, loadavg about 13 since 0.5 published. Under half |>of the reques

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: | |>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- |>Hash: SHA1 |> |>fish wrote: |>| or is there RNF's everywhere right now? |>| |>| it's making it really hard to insert a

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 fish wrote: | or is there RNF's everywhere right now? | | it's making it really hard to insert arg. Not just you. Nodes are overloaded. I could say freenet is being slashdotted ;) | | (congrats to the developers for shipping something, btw :) | |

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Oskar Sandberg
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 04:21:11PM +, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > fish wrote: > > | or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > > | > > | it's making it really hard to inser

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Michael Wiktowy
From: fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 07:55:37 +1100 (EST) On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: I don't think that the solution to the network overloading is through more effective throttling though. An overloaded Freenet does not decay gracefully it would seem. A mo

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Marco A. Calamari
>On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 02:56:49AM +1100, fish wrote: >> or is there RNF's everywhere right now? >> it's making it really hard to insert arg. >This is why I added the desperation code. It's why I tried to delay the >release to put out a mandatory RC2. But it will go away by itself as >pe

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:01:23PM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 04:21:11PM +, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > fish wrote: > > > | or is the

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 07:03:49PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:44:48PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > |>I have constantly near 100% usage of freds threads (configured to 200), > |>13500 requ

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Greg Wooledge
Matthew Toseland ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 07:19:29PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > I've been getting lots of RNFs accompanied by my favorite Freenet error > > message, > > > > Attempts were made to contact 0 nodes. > > > > * 0 were totally unreachable. > >

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:44:48PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > | > |>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > |>Hash: SHA1 > |> > |>fish wrote: > |>| or is

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 07:19:29PM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote: > I've been getting lots of RNFs accompanied by my favorite Freenet error > message, > > Attempts were made to contact 0 nodes. > > * 0 were totally unreachable. > * 0 restarted. > * 0 cleanly rejected. Are you sure you

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 05:22:09PM +0100, Marco A. Calamari wrote: > > >On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 02:56:49AM +1100, fish wrote: > >> or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > >> it's making it really hard to insert arg. > > >This is why I added the desperation code. It's why I tried to dela

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Greg Wooledge
I've been getting lots of RNFs accompanied by my favorite Freenet error message, Attempts were made to contact 0 nodes. * 0 were totally unreachable. * 0 restarted. * 0 cleanly rejected. The network load servlet says: * entries: 50 * globalRequestsPerHour: 4426.84 * l

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > fish wrote: > | or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > | > | it's making it really hard to insert arg. > > Not just you. Nodes are overloaded. I could say freenet is being >

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 02:56:49AM +1100, fish wrote: > > or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > > it's making it really hard to insert arg. This is why I added the desperation code. It's why I tried to delay the release to put out a mandatory RC2. But it will go away by itself as people u

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Michael Wiktowy
> From: Matthew Toseland > Date: 28 Oct 2002 17:00:13 + > > Well... we've had reports of the development branch causing 100% cpu > usage and high loads, but on the other hand the load balancing code is > promising. If you don't mind living on the edge, upgrade to the > development branch (re

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread fish
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > I don't think that the solution to the network overloading is through > > more effective throttling though. An overloaded Freenet does not decay > > gracefully it would seem. A more preferable failure mode would be longer > > waits rather then 99.9

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Derek Glidden
On Mon, 2002-10-28 at 11:44, Jukka Holappa wrote: > I have constantly near 100% usage of freds threads (configured to 200), > 13500 requests / hour, loadavg about 13 since 0.5 published. Under half > of the requests gets answered. > > I would say it's totally overloaded. I'm seeing similar behav

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 02:25:44PM -0500, Michael Wiktowy wrote: > > > From: Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 28 Oct 2002 17:00:13 + > > > > Well... we've had reports of the development branch causing 100% cpu > > usage and high loads, but on the other hand the load balancing co

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Michael Wiktowy
> From: Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 28 Oct 2002 17:00:13 + > > Well... we've had reports of the development branch causing 100% cpu > usage and high loads, but on the other hand the load balancing code is > promising. If you don't mind living on the edge, upgrade to the > dev

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Derek Glidden
On Mon, 2002-10-28 at 11:44, Jukka Holappa wrote: > I have constantly near 100% usage of freds threads (configured to 200), > 13500 requests / hour, loadavg about 13 since 0.5 published. Under half > of the requests gets answered. > > I would say it's totally overloaded. I'm seeing similar behav

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: | Well... we've had reports of the development branch causing 100% cpu | usage and high loads, but on the other hand the load balancing code is | promising. If you don't mind living on the edge, upgrade to the | development bran

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:01:23PM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 04:21:11PM +, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > fish wrote: > > > | or is the

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Oskar Sandberg
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 04:21:11PM +, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > fish wrote: > > | or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > > | > > | it's making it really hard to inser

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 07:03:49PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:44:48PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > |>I have constantly near 100% usage of freds threads (configured to 200), > |>13500 requ

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:44:48PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: |>I have constantly near 100% usage of freds threads (configured to 200), |>13500 requests / hour, loadavg about 13 since 0.5 published. Under half |>of the reques

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:44:48PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > | > |>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > |>Hash: SHA1 > |> > |>fish wrote: > |>| or is

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Toseland wrote: | On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: | |>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- |>Hash: SHA1 |> |>fish wrote: |>| or is there RNF's everywhere right now? |>| |>| it's making it really hard to insert a

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 05:22:09PM +0100, Marco A. Calamari wrote: > > >On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 02:56:49AM +1100, fish wrote: > >> or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > >> it's making it really hard to insert arg. > > >This is why I added the desperation code. It's why I tried to dela

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Marco A. Calamari
>On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 02:56:49AM +1100, fish wrote: >> or is there RNF's everywhere right now? >> it's making it really hard to insert arg. >This is why I added the desperation code. It's why I tried to delay the >release to put out a mandatory RC2. But it will go away by itself as >pe

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 06:21:38PM +0200, Jukka Holappa wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > fish wrote: > | or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > | > | it's making it really hard to insert arg. > > Not just you. Nodes are overloaded. I could say freenet is being >

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Jukka Holappa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 fish wrote: | or is there RNF's everywhere right now? | | it's making it really hard to insert arg. Not just you. Nodes are overloaded. I could say freenet is being slashdotted ;) | | (congrats to the developers for shipping something, btw :) | |

Re: [freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread Matthew Toseland
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 02:56:49AM +1100, fish wrote: > > or is there RNF's everywhere right now? > > it's making it really hard to insert arg. This is why I added the desperation code. It's why I tried to delay the release to put out a mandatory RC2. But it will go away by itself as people u

[freenet-dev] is it just me?

2002-10-28 Thread fish
or is there RNF's everywhere right now? it's making it really hard to insert arg. (congrats to the developers for shipping something, btw :) -fish ___ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li