Re: [freenet-support] RE: trouble getting any information
On Sat, Jul 03, 2004 at 03:04:32PM -0400, Nicholas Sturm wrote: > The second day that it occurred, I was quite unable to evaluate the > system as I had to kill javaw and freenet > to get loose from the state. Ctr-Alt-Del finally interrupted, but that > only got me to the Windows Security > window where I could shutdown processes or the system (Freeenet does not > show on the Applications list). > > This very tight loop was a new phenomenon. I could see some of the log > the first time, but system hung as > I tried to buckup very far in the log. I'll give it another try tonight > and see if I can save the log for you. Which > page is the environmental page? Warning: even zipped, the log will be > large. http://127.0.0.1:/servlet/nodeinfo/internal/env > > Nick -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] RE: trouble getting any information
freenet.exe appears on the process list, but this is just the systray app - to kill the freenet node process you would need to kill the javaw.exe process which spawns it (which shows up in the process list as just javaw.exe). Having said that, I can't remember what happens if you kill javaw.exe but not freenet.exe - i believe freenet.exe pops up a flashing exclamation mark and says Freenet Is Having Problems (which I guess is true). You shouldn't need to kill freenet.exe, ever, as essentially it's doing very little indeed. Even the logfile viewer bugs have disappeared :-) FWIW I've also seen v. high cpu usage if i remove my internet connection - the problem seems to get worse the longer the internet connection is unavailable, which doesn't seem healthy. I get lots of "AARGH! Couldn't send some kind of backoff message" logs in my logfile, sorry I can't remember the exact text but I'm sure the java dev knows what I mean here... d - Original Message - From: "Nicholas Sturm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 8:04 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] RE: trouble getting any information > > >>Apart from describing the behavior, the point I was trying to make was > >>that if this happens when the system is in general operation, many may > >>be affected by freezing of the system -- particularly if ISPs become > >>even more accustomed to doing it -- because those who have a frozen > >>system every morning will likely be inclined not to support nodes except > >>perhaps in the transient state. And then integration into the system > >>for access to information will be unlikely to be very popular. IF the > >>node freed itself when there is no active Internet link, i.e., when into > >>a paused state to avoid freezing, it might remain more useful as a > >>communication medium. Even better perhaps would be a timed pause with a > >>reconnection after a moderate > >>pause period -- 1 minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, or 30 minutes, say. > >>? It does seem like a potential problem. > >> > >> > > > >Well, I don't see why the node would cause a general hang. And in fact, > >I'd expect that the node's high CPU usage would go away quite quickly > >in the absence of an internet connection, given all the backoff... > >evidently this doesn't happen. Any idea why? What does it show on the > >Environment page when in this state? > > > > > The second day that it occurred, I was quite unable to evaluate the > system as I had to kill javaw and freenet > to get loose from the state. Ctr-Alt-Del finally interrupted, but that > only got me to the Windows Security > window where I could shutdown processes or the system (Freeenet does not > show on the Applications list). > > This very tight loop was a new phenomenon. I could see some of the log > the first time, but system hung as > I tried to buckup very far in the log. I'll give it another try tonight > and see if I can save the log for you. Which > page is the environmental page? Warning: even zipped, the log will be > large. > > Nick > > ___ > Support mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] RE: trouble getting any information
Apart from describing the behavior, the point I was trying to make was that if this happens when the system is in general operation, many may be affected by freezing of the system -- particularly if ISPs become even more accustomed to doing it -- because those who have a frozen system every morning will likely be inclined not to support nodes except perhaps in the transient state. And then integration into the system for access to information will be unlikely to be very popular. IF the node freed itself when there is no active Internet link, i.e., when into a paused state to avoid freezing, it might remain more useful as a communication medium. Even better perhaps would be a timed pause with a reconnection after a moderate pause period -- 1 minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, or 30 minutes, say. ? It does seem like a potential problem. Well, I don't see why the node would cause a general hang. And in fact, I'd expect that the node's high CPU usage would go away quite quickly in the absence of an internet connection, given all the backoff... evidently this doesn't happen. Any idea why? What does it show on the Environment page when in this state? The second day that it occurred, I was quite unable to evaluate the system as I had to kill javaw and freenet to get loose from the state. Ctr-Alt-Del finally interrupted, but that only got me to the Windows Security window where I could shutdown processes or the system (Freeenet does not show on the Applications list). This very tight loop was a new phenomenon. I could see some of the log the first time, but system hung as I tried to buckup very far in the log. I'll give it another try tonight and see if I can save the log for you. Which page is the environmental page? Warning: even zipped, the log will be large. Nick ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] 100% cpu in use by javaw.exe
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:10:37PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > i recently installed freenet on my 1300mhz athlon with 512mb ram, the > problem being that javaw.exe is consuming pretty much 100% of my > cpu-power... whats up with that? must be something wrong somewhere? How long after installation? A CPU usage spike is normal for the first half hour or so after startup... -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] RE: trouble getting any information
On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 10:06:00PM -0400, Nicholas Sturm wrote: > Toad wrote: > > >On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 10:56:13AM -0400, Paul wrote: > > > > > >>Many dialup connections are regularly reset. They probably would have > >>locked his account if he had gone over bandwidth or connection time. > >>Getting disconnected is just a fact of life. > >> > >> > > > >Okay so it's not caused by Freenet? Good. > > > > > >>~Paul > >> > >>On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 16:08:53 +0100, Toad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >>>You have no idea WHY it lost the connection to the ISP? Did they contact > >>>you to complain about bandwidth usage or anything? How do you connect to > >>>the internet? Has that changed recently? > >>> > >>> > >>>On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 06:38:37PM -0400, Nicholas Sturm wrote: > >>> > >>> > Restarted freenet last night. Slow to make contacts but by an hour > later > 62 were open and freenet seemed to be behaving nicely together with SETI > running. CPU at 100% but behavior was what I now call "normal." > > At about noon today I checked and data transferred was many megs and > messages were at about 15,000 on two most active connections. Checked > mail > and came back about an hour later to find that SETI had transmitted > results > and was "not" maximized any longer. Then I realized that system seemed > inactive. ISP had closed connection and I had some difficulty getting > anything to respond. Finally after right click on rabbit in tray, I was > able to open popup window and stopped freenet. Few things started to > show > apparent activity and I could then maximize SETI and it had completed > about > 6% of a job after sending and bringing down a new job. > > I then reconnected and restarted freenet and function seemed to return. > I > checked the log and it showed a very long segment of failures. (Log > was at > about 2.5 megs.) Errors continued abundantly as I expected since > contact > had been lost from other nodes for some time. Shut down. (To do other > work.) About three hours later I tried to restart, but experience > little > success. Log hung when I tried to work back through the log (problem > here?). Finally shut down OS and restarted. > > The apparent hang from shut down of ISP connection I had not observed > before (not to say that I actually know it never did). Is this common? > Will freenet do this when only it is producing high CPU usage or could > it > be because two programs were trying to work at maximum level (SETI & > freenet)? Should freenet not detect loss of internet connection and > not go > blindly on with unsuccessful high usage? I would think that when > finally > operating this should not be allowed to happen as ISP closure would > certainly not be uncommon with large numbers of nodes running (even if > it > only happens with multiple high demands on CPU). > > Recently checked thread usage and seems seldom to go beyond 700 even > when > system very busy. > > Oh, 2KWin and Sun Java (recent). 256 memory. Dial up connection. > ~18.6 > hard drives capacity each of two(C: pretty high, about 1.5 gig open, D: > with about 4-5 gig open). What else important? > Apart from describing the behavior, the point I was trying to make was > that if this happens when the system is in general operation, many may > be affected by freezing of the system -- particularly if ISPs become > even more accustomed to doing it -- because those who have a frozen > system every morning will likely be inclined not to support nodes except > perhaps in the transient state. And then integration into the system > for access to information will be unlikely to be very popular. IF the > node freed itself when there is no active Internet link, i.e., when into > a paused state to avoid freezing, it might remain more useful as a > communication medium. Even better perhaps would be a timed pause with a > reconnection after a moderate > pause period -- 1 minute, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, or 30 minutes, say. > ? It does seem like a potential problem. Well, I don't see why the node would cause a general hang. And in fact, I'd expect that the node's high CPU usage would go away quite quickly in the absence of an internet connection, given all the backoff... evidently this doesn't happen. Any idea why? What does it show on the Environment page when in this state? -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org
Re: [freenet-support] Difference between Connection Attempts andRequests.
Dave wrote: They count different things. The former counts connections. The latter counts requests. To my guess, requests are inserts/retrievals, correct? What about connections? Requests can be part of it, yes? What else does it include? Thanks. An inbound connection attempt is when a node contacts your node. An outbound connection attempt is when your node contacts another node. In both cases, after a successful connection, requests can be made, either by your node or by the other node. So for example, an inbound requests implies a connection between your node and the other node, but doesn't imply which way that connection was set up - your node could contact another node, and then after successful connection the other node could make a request to your node: that would be one OUTBOUND connection and one INBOUND request. Similarly, a node could contact your node, and then make a request: that would be one INBOUND connection and one INBOUND request. Similarly for outbound requests, where your node initiates a request to a connected node. One connection persists for as many requests are made to/from the connected node - so one connection (inbound OR outbound) can have many inbound and outbound requests. hope that helps... Thanks that's very helpful. d ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Best regards, Weiliang Zhang Department of Computing Imperial College London, UK ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Difference between Connection Attempts andRequests.
> > They count different things. The former counts connections. The latter > > counts requests. > > To my guess, requests are inserts/retrievals, correct? > > What about connections? Requests can be part of it, yes? What else does > it include? > > Thanks. An inbound connection attempt is when a node contacts your node. An outbound connection attempt is when your node contacts another node. In both cases, after a successful connection, requests can be made, either by your node or by the other node. So for example, an inbound requests implies a connection between your node and the other node, but doesn't imply which way that connection was set up - your node could contact another node, and then after successful connection the other node could make a request to your node: that would be one OUTBOUND connection and one INBOUND request. Similarly, a node could contact your node, and then make a request: that would be one INBOUND connection and one INBOUND request. Similarly for outbound requests, where your node initiates a request to a connected node. One connection persists for as many requests are made to/from the connected node - so one connection (inbound OR outbound) can have many inbound and outbound requests. hope that helps... d ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Difference between Connection Attempts and Requests.
Toad wrote: On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 02:22:39AM +0100, Weiliang Zhang wrote: What are the difference between these two set of data? http://127.0.0.1:/servlet/nodestatus/inboundContacts.txt http://127.0.0.1:/servlet/nodestatus/inboundRequests.txt Inbound contact attempts is different from inbound requests?? They count different things. The former counts connections. The latter counts requests. To my guess, requests are inserts/retrievals, correct? What about connections? Requests can be part of it, yes? What else does it include? Thanks. -- Best regards, Weiliang Zhang Department of Computing Imperial College London, UK ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
