> The measures of memory consumptions are not yet ready, but we have some
> additional intesting results.
I've added memory measurements into git hub. Please check for the explantions
in https://github.com/jamietti/jena/blob/main/README.md
Br, Jaana
> 05.11.2024 10.25 EET jaa...@kolumbus.fi k
> Also, can you share some number in general? How many triples do you
> have? How much memory consumption do you see now compared to earlier
> versions? What kind of Update statements do you make to the triple
> store? 5h in your test for 20k lines of Excel sounds really slow in my
> opinion.
Not that it matters maybe, but I'm wondering if you ever tried to
combine your SPARQL Update request into batches to reduce the number of
requests?
You have 20k lines and for each line you do 6 updates - did you at least
try to send those 6 update statements as a single request?
Also, can y
> Are you using TDB1? TDB2?
It's not even possible to use TDB1 with 5.1.0, UI offers just in-memory and
TDB2 databases.
- Jaana
> 29.10.2024 19.17 EET Andy Seaborne kirjoitti:
>
>
> On 29/10/2024 13:43, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
> >> The gap between 3.14.0 and 5.1.0 is huge. There is also
On 29/10/2024 13:43, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
The gap between 3.14.0 and 5.1.0 is huge. There is also a Jetty change -
Jetty 12 is a fundamentally different architecture in its HTTP handling.
Does it mean that 5.1.0 requires much more meomory ?
In your case, it would seem so. From Jena, f
On 29/10/2024 11:12, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
Hi,
1. Check that the client is properly reading the whole of the response
9even if zero bytes) and is actually closing the connection, or
returning it to the connection pool. Check by running "netstat" to see
TCp connections ("-t" on *nix)
Wit
> The gap between 3.14.0 and 5.1.0 is huge. There is also a Jetty change -
> Jetty 12 is a fundamentally different architecture in its HTTP handling.
Does it mean that 5.1.0 requires much more meomory ?
Jaana
> 29.10.2024 14.13 EET Andy Seaborne kirjoitti:
>
>
> On 29/10/2024 11:12, jaa...
Hi,
> 1. Check that the client is properly reading the whole of the response
> 9even if zero bytes) and is actually closing the connection, or
> returning it to the connection pool. Check by running "netstat" to see
> TCp connections ("-t" on *nix)
With netstat I saw several connections in TIME
On 28/10/2024 10:42, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
Hello, thanks for your answer.
I don't see why you said UI doesn't work.
It was a mistake, I'm sorry. It works, but currentky I have problems with
version 5.1.0.
Let me explain:
I have been running image docker.io/stain/jena-fuseki:3.14.0 for
Hello, thanks for your answer.
> I don't see why you said UI doesn't work.
It was a mistake, I'm sorry. It works, but currentky I have problems with
version 5.1.0.
Let me explain:
I have been running image docker.io/stain/jena-fuseki:3.14.0 for years without
problems, but after upgrade to 5.x
The advice was to simply try out version 5.1.0 from the
stain/jena-fuseki repo: https://hub.docker.com/r/stain/jena-fuseki/tags
The image does nothing more than downloading Fuseki dist tarball,
setting all things up and starting the server. I don't see why you said
UI doesn't work.
Lorenz
Hello, you write below, that stain/* shouldn't be used as it is not part of
Apache Jena project and that there's 5.1.0 in dockerhub. Yes, there are several
5.* images in dockerhub, but I don't know which ones of them are part of Apache
Jena project. Can you help ?
Jaana
> 17.10.2024 14.38 EES
On 18/10/2024 03:49, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
Hi Andy,
You should upgrade to Jena 5.x to get security updates.
if you mean vulnerability of log4j2 from year 2021, they said that
"The vulnerability of log4j2 does impact Fuseki 3.15 - 3.17, and 4.x.".
So 3.14 should be safe. I just renamed th
Sorry for still bothering with this jena-fuseki logging level issue: I managed
to solve the problem and this discussion can be forgotten.
Br Jaana
> 18.10.2024 05.49 EEST jaa...@kolumbus.fi kirjoitti:
>
>
> Hi Andy,
> > You should upgrade to Jena 5.x to get security updates.
> if you mean vu
Hi Andy,
> You should upgrade to Jena 5.x to get security updates.
if you mean vulnerability of log4j2 from year 2021, they said that
"The vulnerability of log4j2 does impact Fuseki 3.15 - 3.17, and 4.x.".
So 3.14 should be safe. I just renamed the file log4j2.properties to
log4j.properties, stor
I would make my own using jena-fuseki-docker.
Then it has the setup for the deployment targetted. Logging, location of
persistent database, text index, base OS, ...
Otherwise, read the descriptions and see what works for you. (most are
forks)
Andy
On 17/10/2024 12:49, jaa...@kolumbus.f
Hi, which one of the possible docker images in Docker hub would you recommend
(I just found the ones in the attachment)?
Br, Jaana
> 17.10.2024 14.38 EEST Andy Seaborne kirjoitti:
>
>
> On 17/10/2024 10:31, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
> >> You should upgrade to Jena 5.x to get security update
On 17/10/2024 10:31, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
You should upgrade to Jena 5.x to get security updates.
The problem is that UI does not work in stain/jena-fuseki-version higher than
4.0.0.
1. stain/* is not a product of the Apache Jena project.
2. Are you sure? There is a 5.1.0 on dockerh
> You should upgrade to Jena 5.x to get security updates.
The problem is that UI does not work in stain/jena-fuseki-version higher than
4.0.0.
Jaana
> 17.10.2024 11.45 EEST Andy Seaborne kirjoitti:
>
>
> On 17/10/2024 03:37, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
> >
> > I'm running docker.io/stain
On 17/10/2024 03:37, jaa...@kolumbus.fi wrote:
I'm running docker.io/stain/jena-fuseki:3.14.0 in podman container on linux redHat host. I a very heavy load it can happen that /var/log/messages-file receives huge amount of INFO-level messages from jena-fuseki. How can I change the log level o
I'm using the old version because UI is broken in the versions of
stain/jena-fuseki since 4.8. But I just discoverd that I can try
stain/jena-fuseki:4.0.0.
Jaana
> 17.10.2024 08.33 EEST Lorenz Buehmann
> kirjoitti:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> is there a reason for using this ancient Fuseki version 3.1
Hi,
is there a reason for using this ancient Fuseki version 3.14.0 instead
of latest 5.1.0 available via the given Docker image?
The problem with your old version is that the log4j properties file
wouldn't be contained in the Tarball file [1] that the Docker container
does download and extra
I'm running docker.io/stain/jena-fuseki:3.14.0 in podman container on linux
redHat host. I a very heavy load it can happen that /var/log/messages-file
receives huge amount of INFO-level messages from jena-fuseki. How can I change
the log level of my container to get rid of these messages ?
T
23 matches
Mail list logo
