Re: ReviewBoard example instance
Hi Stephen, Sorry, I missed the e-mail where you attached the profile log. I'm looking through it now. The render_to_response was misleading. The slowdown is actually within precompute_objects, which does some database queries. That primarily does database queries, but the SQL logs show that they're not taking very long individually. Certainly not a total of 2 seconds. The rendering doesn't appear to be the slow part either. I don't know much about PostgreSQL, but it almost sounds like there's some issue in the configuration or something. If there's a delay in talking to the database (locking? bad connection?) then I could see that causing this. The low SQL query time is interesting. That makes me wonder if it's just an issue in establishing the first connection. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 5:08 AM, Stephen Gallagher step...@gallagherhome.com wrote: On 07/08/2010 07:17 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: On 07/07/2010 06:04 PM, Christian Hammond wrote: Do you happen to have the raw profiling log file too? I want to see the SQL queries as well. There were some heavy optimizations made in Djblets for the datagrid rendering, but I'm not sure if all that made it into beta 2 or not. Christian Sure, attached is the matching .prof file (gzipped since it was rather large uncompressed) *crickets* Christian, have you had a chance to look at this? I'm really unsure how to track this issue down. -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: ReviewBoard example instance
On 07/19/2010 03:00 PM, Christian Hammond wrote: Hi Stephen, Sorry, I missed the e-mail where you attached the profile log. I'm looking through it now. The render_to_response was misleading. The slowdown is actually within precompute_objects, which does some database queries. That primarily does database queries, but the SQL logs show that they're not taking very long individually. Certainly not a total of 2 seconds. The rendering doesn't appear to be the slow part either. I don't know much about PostgreSQL, but it almost sounds like there's some issue in the configuration or something. If there's a delay in talking to the database (locking? bad connection?) then I could see that causing this. The low SQL query time is interesting. That makes me wonder if it's just an issue in establishing the first connection. Well, the problem is that I'm seeing a lag of about 8 seconds for every page load. I can't imagine the SQL query time being that slow... Furthermore, there are other Django-based web applications talking to this same database server without any obvious performance issues. (Specifically, it's a Transifex instance, so it's low-traffic. That wouldn't be wasting DB time). -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Help migrating an old Review Board server
Hi Ian, I would recommend doing a complete, fresh install (of the software, not the site yet) to start out on the new server, rather than copying Review Board files over. Then do an SQL dump of your database (which are you using?) and import it onto the new server. Once you've done that, you should be able to create a site using rb-site install, and specify the information on your database. You my then want to do rb-site upgrade on it just to make sure all the migrations happened properly. It's hard to say how well it will work, given the age of the software, but give it a try. It might work. If it doesn't, we'll look into another solution. Christian -- Christian Hammond - chip...@chipx86.com Review Board - http://www.reviewboard.org VMware, Inc. - http://www.vmware.com On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 3:47 AM, Ian email@gmail.com wrote: I recently inherited a Review Board server which was last updated some time around June 5, 2008. I can't find the version of Review Board that's installed anywhere, but judging by the dates I think this would be a pre-alpha 1.0 installation. I need to migrate it to new hardware/ new OS/current RB/etc. I set up a new server with Review Board 1.0.9, copied the site over, then tried rb-site upgrade, but it didn't like the site (said it couldn't find settings_local.py even though the file is there). All I really want to do is copy the reviews themselves over; I'm quite happy if I have to redo all the settings and generally recreate the site (in fact I'd almost prefer doing that...). Can anyone give me a little help? If it gives you any clue as to which version of Review Board I have, the site's directory looks like this. (ChangeLog, NEWS, README, and __init__.py are all 0 byte files.) $ ls reviewboard AUTHORS contrib settings.py COPYING devserver.shsettings.pyc ChangeLog diffviewer settings_local.py Makefile.am django_evolutionsettings_local.py.tmpl NEWSdjblets settings_local.pyc README htdocs settings_local.py~ __init__.py iphone templates __init__.pycm4 test.py accountsmanage.py urls.py admin reports urls.pyc autogen.sh reviews utils confscmtoolswebapi configure.acserver.sh Ian -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comreviewboard%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: ReviewBoard example instance
On 07/19/2010 03:12 PM, Christian Hammond wrote: Can you verify that the settings_local.py in Review Board and the settings.py in other Django sites are using the exact same database backend? Are all the sites running on the same server? The logs you provided show a lag of ~2 seconds rather than 8, though. If you're seeing 8 from your end, but the logs are showing 2, then there's a whole different issue happening, but I'm assuming it just varies on attempt and page. Well, I think I may be seeing 2s of lag for each component being displayed on the dashboard, which would account for the 8 seconds total. I just confirmed that both Transifex and ReviewBoard are both using postgresql-psycopg2 to talk to the database. Transifex and ReviewBoard themselves are both running on separate servers. Transifex has a dedicated machine at the moment, while ReviewBoard is shared with a number of Trac instances (but the load is low and there's plenty of free memory). -- Want to help the Review Board project? Donate today at http://www.reviewboard.org/donate/ Happy user? Let us know at http://www.reviewboard.org/users/ -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard?hl=en
Re: Issue 1718 in reviewboard: DoesNotExist: Profile matching query does not exist.
Comment #1 on issue 1718 by Jan.Koprowski: DoesNotExist: Profile matching query does not exist. http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=1718 Reproduce: # You must be logged out # Your user can't be known by Review Board * Set Review Board to LDAP authentication * Go to http://reviewboard/r/NUMBER (i.e. http://reviews.reviewboard.org/r/1 ) * In authentication form enter username and password BUT USER which NEVER log into ReviewBoard before. * Login - You will get error in backtrace -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard-issues group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard-iss...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard-issues?hl=en.
Issue 1732 in reviewboard: upgrading from 1.5b2 to 1.5rc1 - this app uses RandomPool which is deprecated
Status: New Owner: Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium New issue 1732 by latchkey: upgrading from 1.5b2 to 1.5rc1 - this app uses RandomPool which is deprecated http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=1732 Not sure if this is an error or not, but felt like it should be reported... http://lists.dlitz.net/pipermail/pycrypto/2008q3/00.html # rb-site upgrade /opt/rb-install Rebuilding directory structure Updating database. This may take a while. Upgrading Review Board from 1.5 beta 2 to 1.5 RC1 There are unapplied evolutions for diffviewer. Project signature has changed - an evolution is required No fixtures found. /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/pycrypto-2.1.0-py2.4-linux-x86_64.egg/Crypto/Util/randpool.py:40: RandomPool_DeprecationWarning: This application uses RandomPool, which is BROKEN in older releases. See http://www.pycrypto.org/randpool-broken Evolution successful. Upgrade complete. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard-issues group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard-iss...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard-issues?hl=en.
Re: Issue 1732 in reviewboard: upgrading from 1.5b2 to 1.5rc1 - this app uses RandomPool which is deprecated
Updates: Status: ThirdParty Comment #1 on issue 1732 by chipx86: upgrading from 1.5b2 to 1.5rc1 - this app uses RandomPool which is deprecated http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/issues/detail?id=1732 Thanks for reporting it, but it's a third-party issue. We're never specifically invoking RandomPool, or actually anything in pycrypto directly. This is probably coming from Paramiko. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups reviewboard-issues group. To post to this group, send email to reviewboard-iss...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to reviewboard-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reviewboard-issues?hl=en.
