Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-13 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Aug 13, 2009, at 12:34 AM, Michael Richter wrote: I've isolated the problem. (Not solved it, but identified it.) The problem was network congestion somewhere between China and wherever sqlite.org is located. After I did a complete shutdown of everything and restarted from scratch

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread Michael Richter
Did you shut off the ability to clone the repository for anonymous users for a reason, Richard? 2009/8/12 Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:20 AM, D. Richard Hipp d...@hwaci.com wrote: Fossil seems to handle 10 years of SQLite revision history easily. The clone

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:23 AM, Michael Richter wrote: Did you shut off the ability to clone the repository for anonymous users for a reason, Richard? That is temporary. I need to get cloning working better first (read: using less bandwidth) before I turn it on to the world. Please be

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:34 AM, ttmrich...@gmail.com wrote: Did you shut off the ability to clone the repository for anonymous users for a reason, Richard? That is temporary. I need to get cloning working better first (read: using less bandwidth) before I turn it on to the world.

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Aug 12, 2009, at 2:06 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:47 PM, D. Richard Hipp d...@hwaci.com wrote: IMPORTANT: Please use the latest fossil binaries when cloning. Otherwise you will use hundreds of megabytes of bandwidth instead of just 12MB. Okay, i've just done

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread Michael Richter
I am really impressed. Downloading the entire SQLITE repository was almost entirely painless. (I had a small problem with updating fossil, but that was fixed by a rebuild of the repository.) Oh, I introduced Joe Armstrong (of Erlang fame/infamy) to Fossil and he was entranced. Expect an

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread Michael Richter
I spoke too soon. Almost all the way through the clone operation I got a message: Bytes Cards Artifacts Deltas Send: 552 22 0 0 Received: 1323205 28469 0 0 Send:9449200 0

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:55 PM, Michael Richter wrote: I spoke too soon. Almost all the way through the clone operation I got a message: Bytes Cards Artifacts Deltas Send: 552 22 0 0 Received: 1323205 28469 0

Re: [fossil-users] Post-partum analysis of porting SQLite history to Fossil

2009-08-12 Thread Michael Richter
I've isolated the problem. (Not solved it, but identified it.) The problem was network congestion somewhere between China and wherever sqlite.org is located. After I did a complete shutdown of everything and restarted from scratch (renegotiating my PPPoE lease) the problem went away by itself.