Re: [FOSSology] Scheduler running slow messages...
Hi Gibran, On Jul 21, 2010, at 12:23 PM, Furosh One wrote: In addition, one of our engineers has also created some reporting tools and he's not sure of the impact the upgrade may have on our report generator, whether it uses the scanner or not. We basically provide reports of our releases that generate all license info per folder/scan we perform on our releases. Yes, this will be a change, but it may be easier in 1.2. It's a change because 1.2 uses different tables to store license results, but it's much easier because all the license results are in a single table. Also in 1.2 you can click on a link to get a file of all the file pathnames and their licenses. That file is easily parsable. Now, I'm wondering if anyone has seen any issues with updatedb somehow getting in the way of the scheduler at times? Other than disk contention I don't know why updatedb would have anything to do with our software. Bob Gobeille ___ fossology mailing list fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
[FOSSology] Upgrade or new install
Does fossology 1.2 install as an upgrade to 1.1 or do I need to do a new install? If it's a new install, can 1.2 run side by side with 1.1? ___ fossology mailing list fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
Re: [FOSSology] Upgrade or new install
Fay Michael T wrote: Does fossology 1.2 install as an upgrade to 1.1 or do I need to do a new install? If it’s a new install, can 1.2 run side by side with 1.1? ___ fossology mailing list fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology Michael, You should be able to upgrade from 1.1 to 1.2 using either the deb packages or the tar ball. We do not recommend trying to run 1.1 and 1.2 at the same time as they both share the same data base and the tables have changed between 1.1 and 1.2. Hope that answers your question, if not, please post again. Thanks for using FOSSology. -- Mark Donohoe OST, Cupertino CA. fossology.org ___ fossology mailing list fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
Re: [FOSSology] Upgrade or new install
Will the red hat rpms work okay, or should I plan on installing from source? -Original Message- From: Mark Donohoe [mailto:mark.dono...@hp.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2010 12:26 PM To: Fay Michael T Cc: 'fossology@fossology.org' Subject: Re: [FOSSology] Upgrade or new install Fay Michael T wrote: Does fossology 1.2 install as an upgrade to 1.1 or do I need to do a new install? If it's a new install, can 1.2 run side by side with 1.1? ___ fossology mailing list fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology Michael, You should be able to upgrade from 1.1 to 1.2 using either the deb packages or the tar ball. We do not recommend trying to run 1.1 and 1.2 at the same time as they both share the same data base and the tables have changed between 1.1 and 1.2. Hope that answers your question, if not, please post again. Thanks for using FOSSology. -- Mark Donohoe OST, Cupertino CA. fossology.org ___ fossology mailing list fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
Re: [FOSSology] Scheduler running slow messages...
We're still collecting some more trace data on the scheduler to determine why this is happening but the engineer looking into this was able to provide this info so far: -- The scheduler uses select() to multiplex I/O to its children and it does a good job of handling that I/O asynchronously. Where it falls down is when it communicates to the postgres server. It does postgres server calls synchronously, and one specific query to the server can take multiple minutes to perform. (It's the status clean-up code in DBCheckStatus(), if you're following this in the source code. :-) The scheduler has a 10-second timeout when waiting for communication to the child processes, but all of the watchdog timeouts for that I/O get blown off when the scheduler waits multiple minutes for a database query. I'm trying to figure out why this particular query should take so long, since the scheduler doesn't seem to wait very long at all to update its status information in the DB. -- I was wondering if this seemed like a reasonable hypothesis on the scheduler's current activity (again running on the older version) or what your thoughts were on this Bob? -FuRoSh... ___ fossology mailing list fossology@fossology.org http://fossology.org/mailman/listinfo/fossology
