>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]
