>On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 07:47:50AM -0000, Toad wrote:
>> As of build 5088 I'm getting startup times in excess of 145 minutes.
>
>Is it swapping much?

yes, disk is in full thrash.. cpu maxed.  other processes grinding to a
halt.

>> This is counting from initiating freenet startup, to freenet being ready to
>> deliver the web interface at 127.0.0.1:8888 in the browser.
>> 
>> latest everything, win98se
>> 
>> P 233
>
>How much RAM? How big datastore? What are the timings? i.e. show me the
>log of the startup at logLevel=normal.

64mb (best this mb will do)

here's the log of last startup:

Aug 6, 2004 2:40:01 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Starting Freenet
(Fred) 0.5 node, build #5090 on JVM Sun Microsystems Inc.:Java HotSpot(TM)
Client VM:1.4.1_03-b02
INFO: Native CPUID library
'freenet/support/CPUInformation/jcpuid-x86-windows.dll' loaded from
resource
INFO: Optimized native BigInteger library
'net/i2p/util/jbigi-windows-pentiummmx.dll' loaded from resource
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:08 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, ERROR): overloadHigh set
to 80% - this will NOT WORK with rate limiting
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:13 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): loading node
keys: node
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:14 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Read node file
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:16 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): starting
filesystem
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:19 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): loading data
store
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:19 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): loading routing
table
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:20 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): From input:
1024.0
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:20 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Setting default
initTransferRate to 1024.0
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:21 PM (freenet.node.rt.NGRoutingTable, main, NORMAL):
Loading estimators
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:22 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Created new NGRT
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:23 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Loaded stats
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:23 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): loading temp
bucket factory
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:23 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): loaded temp
bucket factory
Aug 6, 2004 2:40:23 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Loaded bucket
factory
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:04 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): read seed nodes
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:04 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Initial refs
count: 2, seeds: 607
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:04 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): not seeding
routing table
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:06 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): saved routing
table
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:06 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): starting node
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:17 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): Detected Windows
98/ME. Limiting connections accordingly. To get rid of this message, use a
proper operating system - sorry
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:19 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): loading service:
mainport
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:23 PM (freenet.node.Main, main, NORMAL): loading service:
distribution
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:24 PM
(freenet.interfaces.servlet.SingleHttpServletContainer, main, NORMAL):
Loading the single servlet distribution.params.servlet
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:25 PM (freenet.node.Node, main, NORMAL): Starting ticker..
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:25 PM (freenet.node.Node, main, NORMAL): Starting
interfaces..
Aug 6, 2004 4:55:25 PM (freenet.node.http.BookmarkManagerServlet, main,
NORMAL): Bookmarks updated on request


>> 
>> The situation has not improved with 5089 or 5090.
>> 
>> 
>> Also, What's with 24mb seednodes?
>> 
>> Isn't that starting to get excessive?  Why do the refs have to be so large?
>> can they at least be compressed with winrar to make transport easier?
>> (though I expect that the monster seednodes.ref is part of the ultra long
>> time getting started... a few builds back with seednodes no more than 2mb
>> it was able to start up in about 5 min.
>
>They are, with bzip2.
>> 
>> 
>> Please excuse me for 'borrowing' the email addy, I like to post anon, if
>> there is an acceptable means to post to this list anonymously (via
>> remailers) please advise and I will change tactics.
>
>Anonymous remailers that support spoofing addresses are generally
>regarded as anti-social. Doesn't it have a generic default address?


remailer supports full from headers.  it's not used with abuse in mind, but
anonymity with recognizeability. yeah, i know that many abuse such things,
esp on usenet. but in this case simply a means to post anon to a subscribe
only email list.  as test however, this sent without custom from and see if
it makes it to the list.. if not, i'll put disclaimer at top and repost
this as quote with full from of somebody on the list.   or is there an
acceptable anon 'from' i can use that will not have to be bounced or
reviewed by list management to get posted?




_______________________________________________
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]

Reply via email to