Well, in theory 993 fixes the "freenet always shrinks on startup" problem. In practice it doesn't and I will fix it soon. I have heard from various people that shrinks can sometimes take much longer than at other times; this may also be an issue.
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 02:12:22PM +0100, Guido Winkelmann wrote: > Hi, > > In the meantime, things are getting much worse here: > > http://freenet.thisisatest.de/part_of_wrapper.log-2 > > As you can see, the node has started restarting on 2006/11/02 11:51:09, and > still (2006/11/04 13:44:17) hasn't finished yet. That's 48 hours and > counting. > > Guido > > Am Mittwoch, 1. November 2006 18:45 schrieb toad: > > Okay, the long start-up times are due to a hack we incorporated to not > > clobber everyone's cache during the migration to a split store/cache. I > > will remove this very soon and make the store and the cache equal sizes. > > This will also prevent the store+cache temporarily using more than the > > specified limit. > > > > On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 05:07:35PM +0100, Guido Winkelmann wrote: > > > Am Samstag, 28. Oktober 2006 17:43 schrieb Guido Winkelmann: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Am Donnerstag, 26. Oktober 2006 22:53 schrieben Sie: > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > Bizarre. > > > > > > > > > > The first time, it takes from 00:13:10 to 01:14:15 *the next day* (so > > > > > around 25 hours) to read half of the store. The second time it takes > > > > > from 01:18:04 to 03:11:33 (2 hours) to read the entire store. There's > > > > > something else going on here, no idea what. Does this happen often? > > > > > How's memory usage? > > > > > > > > The problem persists. Right now (17:30) the node is at "Reading store > > > > prior to shrink: 34%", the startup of the node was at 02:09 in the > > > > morning. > > > > > > > > There is nothing special running on that box (besides freenet), a few > > > > standard services (a webserver, a mailserver, a small postgres > > > > database...), but that's it. Memory usage is also pretty standard, with > > > > about 66 MiB of swap in use (which is nothing special fo a server > > > > machine.) Everything else on the machine is running normally, I don't > > > > even see any significant slowdown anywhere. (Even though freenet is > > > > using 99% CPU.) > > > > > > > > Anyone else got this problem? > > > > > > > > Guido > > > > > > Another follow-up: > > > > > > Right now, I'm mostly unable to use freenet, because most of the times I > > > find my node "in the process of starting up". > > > > > > This might be related: > > > During one of the rare occassions when my node was actually up and > > > running, I found it to be noticeably slower than usual (even for > > > freenet). Bandwidth usage was about 2 KB/sec (in+out), of 100 KB/sec > > > allowed (about a tenth of the usual amount). Also, the java process was > > > still using 99% CPU constantly. > > > > > > Guido > > -- > Mailing list archives are not a proper form of documentation. > _______________________________________________ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20061106/cdb0ba20/attachment.pgp>
