Arek Kasprzyk wrote: > > On 1 Sep 2006, at 10:27, David Withers wrote: > >> Hi Arek, >> >> I just want to check a couple of things as I investigate this. >> >> 1. Are you seeing the above sequence of requests happening 100,000 times? > > no, not the sequence of requests x 100,000, all of them ~100,000. > given that the sequece consists of 15 requests (most of which are > configuration > request, the sequence would happen ~6,000x15
The multiple 'datasets' and 'configuration' requests you are seeing was due to cached results of those requests being lost when objects were serialized - this problem has been fixed in the current code. >> 2. Does each request happen twice or is the logger reporting it twice? >> > > the request happens twice as far as I can make it. I can't see anything in the client causing each query to be made twice. Maybe the workflow does this explicitly. > I am only trying to signal the problem on the list. Perhaps it would be > best if I got > you in touch with the guys who are working on these workflows (offline) > and they will give > you more details themselves so you can verify that such problem really > exists and if so > diagnose it further with them and come up with the plan for improvements > if necessary > > what do you think? > a. I don't think we could prevent people from creating queries that have, for example, an ensembl_transcript_id filter with one id - it's a perfectly valid query. We could probably restrict the number of requests that can be made to a biomart service within a set timeframe. However, it would be better to restrict access on the server side - if the server starts sending errors back then Taverna, or another client using the martservice interface, can retry later, using appropriate backoff and delay. David. -- David Withers School of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. Tel: +44(0)161 275 0145
