Yes, trunk is fine since there are no changes in filters between 0.1 and trunk.
--- Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset > -----Original Message----- > From: David Alves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 8:44 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > Hi Jim > The job I left running before the weekend had some > (other) problems, mainly about hadoop API change. > Anyway I'm running it again right now and at first > glance its working (I'll know for sure in about 1 hour), on a > different note there was a problem with RegExpRowFilter where > if it received more that one conditional in the constructor > map it would filter out records it shouldn't, and that > problem is solved. > As Friday before I got your response I had already > upgraded the cluster to the hadoop and hbase trunk versions > I'm currently testing with these versions instead of 0.1, > hope there is no problem there. > I'll send another email soon. > > Regards > David Alves > > On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 08:31 -0700, Jim Kellerman wrote: > > David, > > > > Any luck running this patch either against head or against > the 0.1 branch? > > > > Thanks. > > > > --- > > Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: David Alves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 10:05 AM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: RE: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > Hi Jim > > > > > > Of course, my questions was regarding whether I > should use > > > HEAD or some branch or tag. > > > Anyways I currently running Hbase HEAD patched against > > > Hadoop HEAD, I'll know if its ok soon. > > > > > > Regards > > > David Alves > > > On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 09:18 -0700, Jim Kellerman wrote: > > > > After applying the patch, you have to rebuild and > deploy on your > > > > cluster, run your test that was failing and verify that it > > > now works. > > > > See > > > > > > > > http://hadoop.apache.org/hbase/docs/current/api/overview-summary.htm > > > l# > > > > overview_description > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: David Alves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 6:29 AM > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Subject: RE: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > > > > > Hi all again > > > > > > > > > > I've never used the patch system you guys use, so > > > in order > > > > > to test the patch submitted by Clint what do I have to do? I > > > > > mean I've updated HEAD and applied the patch, is this it? > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > David Alves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 10:18 -0700, Jim Kellerman wrote: > > > > > > Thanks David. I'll add 554 as a blocker for 0.1.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: David Alves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 9:21 AM > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Subject: RE: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Jim and all > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll commit to test the patch under the same > > > > > conditions as > > > > > > > it failed before, (with around 36000 records) but in this > > > > > > > precise moment I preparing my next development > > > iteration, which > > > > > means a lot > > > > > > > of meetings. > > > > > > > By the end of the day tomorrow (friday) I > > > should have a > > > > > > > confirmation whether the patch worked (or not). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > David Alves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 09:12 -0700, Jim Kellerman wrote: > > > > > > > > David, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you had a chance to try this patch? We are about to > > > > > > > release hbase-0.1.1 and until we receive a confirmation in > > > > > > > HBASE-554 from another person who has tried it and > > > > > verifies that it > > > > > > > works, we cannot include it in this release. If > it is not in > > > > > > > this release, there will be a significant wait for it > > > to appear > > > > > > > in an hbase release. hbase-0.1.2 will not happen anytime > > > > > > > soon > > > > > unless there > > > > > > > are critical issues that arise that have not been > > > fixed in 0.1.1. > > > > > > > hbase-0.2.0 is also some time in the future. There are a > > > > > significant > > > > > > > number of issues to address before that release is ready. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Frankly, I'd like to see this patch in 0.1.1, > because it > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > an issue for people that use filters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The alternative would be for Clint to supply a test case > > > > > > > that fails without the patch but passes with the patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We will hold up the release, but need a > commitment either > > > > > > > from David to test the patch or for Clint to > supply a test. > > > > > > > We need that commitment by the end of the day today > > > > > > > 2008/04/03 along with an eta as to when it will > be completed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: David Alves > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 2:36 PM > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just deployed the unpatched version. > > > > > > > > > Tomorrow I'll rebuild the system with > the patch > > > > > > > and try it > > > > > > > > > out. > > > > > > > > > Thanks again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > David Alves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: Jim Kellerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:04 PM > > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you tried this patch and does it work for > > > you? If so > > > > > > > > > > we'll include it > > > > > > > > > > hbase-0.1.1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Jim Kellerman, Senior Engineer; Powerset > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: David Alves > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:44 AM > > > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the prompt path Clint, > St.Ack and > > > > > > > all you guys. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > David Alves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > On Behalf > > > > > > > > > > > > Of Clint Morgan > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 2:04 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Try the patch at > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-554. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > -clint > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 5:39 AM, David Alves > > > > > > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi ... again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my previous mail I stated that > > > > > increasing the > > > > > > > > > > > stack size > > > > > > > > > > > > solved the > > > > > > > > > > > > > problem, well I jumped a little bit to the > > > > > conclusion, > > > > > > > > > > > in fact it > > > > > > > > > > > > > didn't, the StackOverFlowError always occurs > > > > > at the end > > > > > > > > > > > of the cycle > > > > > > > > > > > > > when no more records match the filter. Anyway > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've > > > > > > > > > rewritten my > > > > > > > > > > > > > application to use a normal scanner > and and do > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > "filtering" after > > > > > > > > > > > > > which is not optimal but it works. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm just saying this because it might > > > > > be a clue, > > > > > > > > > > > in previous > > > > > > > > > > > > versions > > > > > > > > > > > > > (!= 0.1.0) even though a more serious > > > > > problem happened > > > > > > > > > > > > > (regionservers became irresponsive after so > > > > > > > > > > > > > many > > > > > > > > > records) this > > > > > > > > > > > > > didn't happen. Btw in current version I > > > notice no, > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > very small, > > > > > > > > > > > > > decrease of thoughput with time, great work! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Alves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 05:18 +0100, David > > > Alves wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As I was almost at the end (80%) > > > of indexable > > > > > > > > > > > docs, for the > > > > > > > > > > > > time > > > > > > > > > > > > > > being I simply increased the stack size, > > > > > > > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > seemed to work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your input St.Ack > > > really helped me > > > > > > > > > > > solve the problem > > > > > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > least for the moment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On another note in the same > > > method I changed > > > > > > > > > the way the > > > > > > > > > > > > scanner was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > obtained when htable.getStartKeys() > > > would be more > > > > > > > > > > > > > than > > > > > > > > > > > 1, so that > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > > > > > > > limit the records read each time > to a single > > > > > > > > > region, and the > > > > > > > > > > > > > scanning > > > > > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > > > > > start at the last region, strangely > > > the number of > > > > > > > > > > > > > keys > > > > > > > > > > > obtained > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > htable.getStartKeys() was always 1 > > > even though > > > > > > > > > by the end > > > > > > > > > > > > > there are > > > > > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 21 regions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Alves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: stack > > > > > > > > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: > > > > > > > > > > > Sunday, March > > > > > > > > > > > > > 30, 2008 9:36 PM > > To: > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Re: StackOverFlow Error in HBase > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You're > > > > > > > > > doing nothing > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The filters as written recurse until > > > they find > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > match. If > > > > > > > > > > > > > long > > stretches between matching rows, > > > > > then you will > > > > > > > > > > > get a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > StackOverflowError. Filters need to > be changed. > > > > > > > Thanks for > > > > > > > > > > > > pointing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this out. Can you do without > them for the > > > > > > > > > > > > > moment > > > > > > > > > > > until we get > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > chance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to fix it? (HBASE-554) > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > St.Ack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Alves wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi St.Ack and all > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The error always occurs when > > > trying to see if > > > > > > > > > > > there are more > > > > > > > > > > > > rows to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes I'm using a > > > filter(RegExpRowFilter) to > > > > > > > > > > > select only the rows > > > > > > > > > > > > (any > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > row key) that match a specific > > > value in one > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the columns. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then I obtain the scanner just test > > > > > the hasNext > > > > > > > > > > > method, close > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scanner and return. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am I doing something wrong? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Still StackOverflowError is not > > > supposed to > > > > > > > > > happen right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Alves > > > On Thu, > 2008-03-27 at > > > > > > > > > > > > > 12:36 -0700, > > > stack wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> You are using a filter? If > so, tell us > > > > > > > more about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> St.Ack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> David Alves wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Hi guys > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> I 'm using HBase to keep > > > data that is > > > > > > > > > > > later indexed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> The data is indexed in > > > chunks so the > > > > > > > > > > > cycle is get XXXX > > > > > > > > > > > > records index > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> them check for more records etc... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> When I tryed the candidate-2 > > > > > instead of > > > > > > > > > > > the old 0.16.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > (which I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> switched to do to the regionservers > > > > > > > > > > > > > becoming > > > > > > > > > > > unresponsive) > > > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > > got the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> error in the end of this email > > > well into an > > > > > > > > > indexing job. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> So you have any idea > > > why? Am I doing > > > > > > > > > > > something wrong? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> David Alves > > >>> > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > java.lang.RuntimeException: > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.ipc.RemoteException: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> java.io.IOException: > > > > > java.lang.StackOverflowError > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > java.io.DataInputStream.readFully(DataInputStream.java:178 > > > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > java.io.DataInputStream.readLong(DataInputStream.java:399) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.dfs.DFSClient > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > $BlockReader.readChunk(DFSClient.java:735) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.fs.FSInputChecker.readChecksumChunk(FSInpu > > > > > > > > > > > tC > > > > > > > > > > > hecker.java: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 234) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.fs.FSInputChecker.fill(FSInputChecker.java:176 > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.fs.FSInputChecker.read1(FSInputChecker.java:19 > > > > > > > > > 3) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.fs.FSInputChecker.read(FSInputChecker.java:157 > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.dfs.DFSClient > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $BlockReader.read(DFSClient.java:658) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.dfs.DFSClient > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > $DFSInputStream.readBuffer(DFSClient.java:1130) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.dfs.DFSClient > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > $DFSInputStream.read(DFSClient.java:1166) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > java.io.DataInputStream.readFully(DataInputStream.java:178 > > > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.io.DataOutputBuffer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > $Buffer.write(DataOutputBuffer.java:56) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.io.DataOutputBuffer.write(DataOutputBuffer.java:90 > > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.io.SequenceFile > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $Reader.next(SequenceFile.java:1829) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.io.SequenceFile > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $Reader.next(SequenceFile.java:1729) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.io.SequenceFile > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $Reader.next(SequenceFile.java:1775) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.io.MapFile$Reader.next(MapFile.java:461) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HStore > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > $StoreFileScanner.getNext(HStore.java:2350) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HAbstractScanner.next(HAbstractScanner.java: > > > > > > > > > > > 25 > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HStore > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HStoreScanner.next(HStore.java:2561) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1807) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> at > > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HRegion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> $HScanner.next(HRegion.java:1843) > > > > > > > >>> ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: > 269.22.3/1354 - > > > > > > > > > > > Release > > > > > > > > > > > Date: 4/1/2008 5:38 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.3/1354 - > > > > > Release Date: > > > > > > > > > > 4/1/2008 > > > > > > > > > > 5:38 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.3/1354 - > > > > > > > > > Release > > > > > > > > > Date: 4/1/2008 5:38 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1357 - > > > Release Date: > > > > > > > > 4/3/2008 10:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1357 - Release > > > > > > > Date: 4/3/2008 10:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1357 - > Release Date: > > > > > > 4/3/2008 10:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1359 - Release > > > > > Date: 4/4/2008 8:23 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > > > Checked by AVG. > > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1359 - Release Date: > > > > 4/4/2008 8:23 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG. > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1359 - Release > > > Date: 4/4/2008 8:23 AM > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG. > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.8/1362 - Release Date: > > 4/6/2008 11:12 AM > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.8/1363 - Release > Date: 4/7/2008 8:56 AM > > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.8/1363 - Release Date: 4/7/2008 8:56 AM
