On Saturday 06 June 2009 22:56:03 Victor Denisov wrote:
> > Do you (anyone, everyone, especially on windows with low end
> > hardware) get good performance with queued downloads on 1214 now? Can
> > I close the bug concerning this thread? (#3075)
>
> I've ran 1215 for a few hours now under various
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Do you (anyone, everyone, especially on windows with low end
> hardware) get good performance with queued downloads on 1214 now? Can
> I close the bug concerning this thread? (#3075)
I've ran 1215 for a few hours now under various loads, and can say
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Monday 04 May 2009 21:21:50 Victor Denisov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
>> much as to render it completely unusable while Fr
On Monday 04 May 2009 21:21:50 Victor Denisov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
> much as to render it completely unusable while Freenet is running. I
> can't perform simplest tasks, such as surfing or typing a document, as
> switching betwe
On Sunday 17 May 2009 22:24:57 Juiceman wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
> >> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> >> >>
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
>> wrote:
>> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
>> >> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> >> Weird. ?node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. ?I deleted it and and added a
> >> >> bunch of downloads. ?Now it is less than 10 MB.
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> >> Weird. ?node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. ?I deleted it and and added a
> >> >> bunch of downloads. ?Now it is less than 10 MB.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
>> wrote:
>> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
>> >> >> Weird. ?node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. ?I deleted it and and
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
>> wrote:
>> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
>> >> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and added a
> >> >> bunch of downloads. Now it is less than 10 MB.
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 18:29:47 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and added a
> >> >> bunch of downloads. Now it is less than 10 MB.
> On Wed, 13 May 2009 13:29:47 -0400,
> Evan Daniel wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> >> Weird. ?node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. ?I deleted it and and
> >> >> added a bunch of downloads. ?Now it is less th
> On Wed, 13 May 2009 13:29:47 -0400,
> Evan Daniel wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
> wrote:
> > On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and
> >> >> added a bunch of downloads. Now it is less th
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
>> >> Weird. ?node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. ?I deleted it and and added a
>> >> bunch of downloads. ?Now it is less than 10 MB. ?That definitely
>> >> helped some with the disk thrashing.
>>
On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> Weird. ?node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. ?I deleted it and and added a
> >> bunch of downloads. ?Now it is less than 10 MB. ?That definitely
> >> helped some with the disk thrashing.
> >>
> >> I think I found the main problem, and I'm embarrassed t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
>> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and added a
>> >> bunch of downloads. Now it is less than 10 MB. That definit
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland
wrote:
> On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
>> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and added a
>> >> bunch of downloads. Now it is less than 10 MB. That definitely
>> >> helped some with the disk thrashing.
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:33 AM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
>> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and added a
>> >> bunch of downloads. Now it is less than 10 MB. That definit
On Friday 08 May 2009 17:40:58 Juiceman wrote:
> >> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and added a
> >> bunch of downloads. Now it is less than 10 MB. That definitely
> >> helped some with the disk thrashing.
> >>
> >> I think I found the main problem, and I'm embarrassed t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>> Victor - might this be your issue as well?
>
> ROFL. So that just leaves victor...
Sorry, was away on a long weekend :-(. I'll fire up the node first thing
tomorrow with requested logging and will report back.
Regards,
Victor Denisov.
-BEGIN
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>> Victor - might this be your issue as well?
>
> ROFL. So that just leaves victor...
Sorry, was away on a long weekend :-(. I'll fire up the node first thing
tomorrow with requested logging and will report back.
Regards,
Victor Denisov.
-BEGIN
On Friday 08 May 2009 06:01:06 Juiceman wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:18:13 Victor Denisov wrote:
> >> > Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost
a
> > bit
> >> > more than downloads do with db4o.
>> Weird. ?node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. ?I deleted it and and added a
>> bunch of downloads. ?Now it is less than 10 MB. ?That definitely
>> helped some with the disk thrashing.
>>
>> I think I found the main problem, and I'm embarrassed to say
>> apparantly I had xmlspider plugin running and wr
>> Weird. node.db4o was an insane 375 MB. I deleted it and and added a
>> bunch of downloads. Now it is less than 10 MB. That definitely
>> helped some with the disk thrashing.
>>
>> I think I found the main problem, and I'm embarrassed to say
>> apparantly I had xmlspider plugin running and wr
On Friday 08 May 2009 06:01:06 Juiceman wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:18:13 Victor Denisov wrote:
> >> > Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost
a
> > bit
> >> > more than downloads do with db4o.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:18:13 Victor Denisov wrote:
>> > Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost a
> bit
>> > more than downloads do with db4o...
>>
>> No,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:18:13 Victor Denisov wrote:
>> > Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost a
> bit
>> > more than downloads do with db4o...
>>
>> No,
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:18:13 Victor Denisov wrote:
> > Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost a
bit
> > more than downloads do with db4o...
>
> No, only downloads. Total queued size varied between 25 Mb and 350 Mb in
> my tests (but actual total file size was
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:12:17 Victor Denisov wrote:
> >> The problem's that Freenet *doesn't* even use the amount of memory I
> >> provide it with (I'm yet to see it use more than 120 megs out of 320 I
> >> allow for the heap). I'd be willing to dedicate as much memory as
> >> required if only
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Maybe turning off logging helps? Does Juiceman also have logging
> enabled? This appears to only affect Microsoft users?
On ERROR, Freenet writes about 2-5 Kb per 10 minutes, which is really
nothing. On NORMAL, it writes up to 5 Mb per 10 minutes, o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost a bit
> more than downloads do with db4o...
No, only downloads. Total queued size varied between 25 Mb and 350 Mb in
my tests (but actual total file size was often more than re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>> The problem's that Freenet *doesn't* even use the amount of memory I
>> provide it with (I'm yet to see it use more than 120 megs out of 320 I
>> allow for the heap). I'd be willing to dedicate as much memory as
>> required if only it'd help.
>
> W
On Wed, 6 May 2009 16:38:10 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 May 2009 15:26:12 Dennis Nezic wrote:
> > On Wed, 06 May 2009 17:43:59 +0400, Victor Denisov wrote:
> > > Any logging I can turn on to help? BTW, I have logging set to
> > > ERROR for now, as with NORMAL level it logs ~2Mb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> This is the downside of db4o. If it is a widespread problem, we're gonna have
> to revert it. Which means throwing away more than 6 months work largely
> funded by Google's $18K.
I think that using a database is a good idea
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 15:26:12 Dennis Nezic wrote:
> On Wed, 06 May 2009 17:43:59 +0400, Victor Denisov wrote:
> > Any logging I can turn on to help? BTW, I have logging set to ERROR
> > for now, as with NORMAL level it logs ~2Mb per minute, adding
> > noticeably to overall disk contention.
>
>
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:18:13 Victor Denisov wrote:
> > Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost a
bit
> > more than downloads do with db4o...
>
> No, only downloads. Total queued size varied between 25 Mb and 350 Mb in
> my tests (but actual total file size was
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 19:12:17 Victor Denisov wrote:
> >> The problem's that Freenet *doesn't* even use the amount of memory I
> >> provide it with (I'm yet to see it use more than 120 megs out of 320 I
> >> allow for the heap). I'd be willing to dedicate as much memory as
> >> required if only
On Wed, 6 May 2009 16:38:10 +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 May 2009 15:26:12 Dennis Nezic wrote:
> > On Wed, 06 May 2009 17:43:59 +0400, Victor Denisov wrote:
> > > Any logging I can turn on to help? BTW, I have logging set to
> > > ERROR for now, as with NORMAL level it logs ~2Mb
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 14:43:59 Victor Denisov wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > This is the downside of db4o. If it is a widespread problem, we're gonna
have
> > to revert it. Which means throwing away more than 6 months work largely
> > funded by Google's $18K.
>
> I think that using a dat
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 14:43:59 Victor Denisov wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > This is the downside of db4o. If it is a widespread problem, we're gonna
have
> > to revert it. Which means throwing away more than 6 months work largely
> > funded by Google's $18K.
>
> I think that using a dat
On Monday 04 May 2009 21:21:50 Victor Denisov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
> much as to render it completely unusable while Freenet is running. I
> can't perform simplest tasks, such as surfing or typing a document, as
> switching betwe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Maybe turning off logging helps? Does Juiceman also have logging
> enabled? This appears to only affect Microsoft users?
On ERROR, Freenet writes about 2-5 Kb per 10 minutes, which is really
nothing. On NORMAL, it writes up to 5 Mb per 10 minutes, o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Do you have uploads queued as well as downloads? Generally uploads cost a bit
> more than downloads do with db4o...
No, only downloads. Total queued size varied between 25 Mb and 350 Mb in
my tests (but actual total file size was often more than re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
>> The problem's that Freenet *doesn't* even use the amount of memory I
>> provide it with (I'm yet to see it use more than 120 megs out of 320 I
>> allow for the heap). I'd be willing to dedicate as much memory as
>> required if only it'd help.
>
> W
On Wed, 06 May 2009 17:43:59 +0400, Victor Denisov wrote:
> Any logging I can turn on to help? BTW, I have logging set to ERROR
> for now, as with NORMAL level it logs ~2Mb per minute, adding
> noticeably to overall disk contention.
Maybe turning off logging helps? Does Juiceman also have logging
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 15:26:12 Dennis Nezic wrote:
> On Wed, 06 May 2009 17:43:59 +0400, Victor Denisov wrote:
> > Any logging I can turn on to help? BTW, I have logging set to ERROR
> > for now, as with NORMAL level it logs ~2Mb per minute, adding
> > noticeably to overall disk contention.
>
>
On Wed, 06 May 2009 17:43:59 +0400, Victor Denisov wrote:
> Any logging I can turn on to help? BTW, I have logging set to ERROR
> for now, as with NORMAL level it logs ~2Mb per minute, adding
> noticeably to overall disk contention.
Maybe turning off logging helps? Does Juiceman also have logging
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 14:43:59 Victor Denisov wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > This is the downside of db4o. If it is a widespread problem, we're gonna
have
> > to revert it. Which means throwing away more than 6 months work largely
> > funded by Google's $18K.
>
> I think that using a dat
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 14:43:59 Victor Denisov wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > This is the downside of db4o. If it is a widespread problem, we're gonna
have
> > to revert it. Which means throwing away more than 6 months work largely
> > funded by Google's $18K.
>
> I think that using a dat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> This is the downside of db4o. If it is a widespread problem, we're gonna have
> to revert it. Which means throwing away more than 6 months work largely
> funded by Google's $18K.
I think that using a database is a good idea
On Monday 04 May 2009 21:21:50 Victor Denisov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
> much as to render it completely unusable while Freenet is running. I
> can't perform simplest tasks, such as surfing or typing a document, as
> switching betwe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I see it too. I have my node installed on it's own separate disk yet
> it stalls my quad-core system. It's as if the HDD controller chip is
> so swamped with disk ops that the OS and other apps are starved for
> resources. I'm seeing disk queues e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> I see it too. I have my node installed on it's own separate disk yet
> it stalls my quad-core system. It's as if the HDD controller chip is
> so swamped with disk ops that the OS and other apps are starved for
> resources. I'm seeing disk queues e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
much as to render it completely unusable while Freenet is running. I
can't perform simplest tasks, such as surfing or typing a document, as
switching between tabs in Opera c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Victor Denisov wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello,
>
> Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
> much as to render it completely unusable while Freenet is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Victor Denisov wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello,
>
> Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
> much as to render it completely unusable while Freenet is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
Since my node autoupdated to 1208, my system's performance degraded so
much as to render it completely unusable while Freenet is running. I
can't perform simplest tasks, such as surfing or typing a document, as
switching between tabs in Opera c
58 matches
Mail list logo
