Subject:
|
Re: Traffic Error
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 17 Apr 1999 05:34:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
868 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, galliard@shades-of-night.com (James Brown) writes:
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Tom McDonald writes:
> > > In lugnet.admin.general, Tom McDonald writes:
> > > > Today about 2:25 pm PDT I noticed things had gone "All Quiet" on the
> > > > traffic page. But about 10 minutes later, I reloaded the page and it
> > > > gave me at least 7 starwars messages as well a smattering of messages
> > > > (all less than 7) from few other groups as being posted within the
> > > > last hour. I checked to see if they were new, even though their red
> > > > numbers were not blazingly red, and noted that I had read them before.
> > >
> > > Immediately after posting this, I refreshed the traffic page again, and
> > > it seemed that the same groups were there with fewer messages posted
> > > within the hour - about what I expected.
> > >
> > > Maybe it accidentally burped out an "All Quiet" earlier. Also, I forgot to
> > > mention that when I refreshed a couple of times earlier (to see if indeed
> > > things were quiet) I got the same "AQ" response each time. Just thought • you
> > > should know.
> >
> > And it's not just Tom. :)
> > I noticed that too, and was wandering over here to ask about it.
>
> Thanks to both of you for reporting & documenting this.
>
> Let's see what we can find out. 2:25pm PDT today equals 5:25pm EDT, equals
> 924297900 seconds past the epoch, so what's in the activity log snapshots at
> that time...? Hmm, nothing odd there, but let's look backward in time a
> bit...
>
> 924290100
> 924290400
> 924290700
> 924291000
> 924291300
> 924291600
> 924291900
> 924292200 :
> 924292500 :
> 924292800 1:00
> 924293100 :
> 924294000 :
> 924294300 :
> 924294600 :30
> 924294900 :
> 924295200 :
> 924295500 :45
> 924295800 :
> 924296100 :
> 924296400 2:00
> 924296700 :
> 924297000 :
> 924297300 :15
> 924297600 :
> 924297900 <--- 2:25pm PDT <--- anomaly observed here
> 924298200 :
> 924298500 :
> 924298800
> 924299100
> 924299400
> 924299700
>
> HEY -- look at that! The log entries for 924293400 and 924293700 are
> missing. And these correspond to 1:10pm EDT and 1:15pm EDT, which would
> completely explain the confusion if you loaded the page anytime between
> 2:20pm and 2:19pm (how close to 2:25pm did you see the problem?)
I'm not certain, as I was kinda busy doing that radio thing.
> Let me check my mailbox. Hey, guess what? Cron (the program that launches
> the logger every 5 minutes) sent mail saying there was a problem at 5:10pm
> EST and again at 5:15pm EST. It's not saying what happened (because I
> didn't ask it to log these particular details), but I can guess what's going
> on.
>
> I have a semaphore in the logging code which prevents multiple simultaneous
> invocations of cron-spawned jobs. This is super-important for things like
> sending out periodic digests and stuff like that -- you don't want to start
> up a new process to service a pending request until the previous one is
> complete. In theory, the logging code, which takes snapshots of the news
> article counts every 5 minutes, should be able to do its work in 1/10 second
> and be all done with it. In this case, however, it took more than 10
> minutes. Why? Because the snapshot logger is still running an old broken
> low-level DB library that gets very bloated (large and slow) after zillions
> of additions and deletions. It's 75MB right now when it should only be
> 8MB. Until I cut this particular script over to the new & better DB code,
> I have to rebuild its data file every couple of months. I just did that
> now, but this is only a band-aid. The reason I haven't cut over this module
> to the new DB library is because it operates on relatively "live" data
> (updated every 5 minutes) so the best time to mess with it would be in the
> middle of the night, when I'm usually either sleeping or banging out brand-
> new code. (I also wasn't 100% convinced until now that the problem was
> really as bad as it is (was).)
>
> So the problem -could- recur in another month or so. I'll post here again
> hopefully before then when I've cut over to the newer & far safer DB
> routines. (Whew!)
>
> --Todd
Umm... okay. (feeling a bit stupider than usual) <:^,
I'll just mess with this 10-piece Winnie-the-Pooh puzzle until you work it out.
Y'know Todd, I'm surprised that with all your patience and willingness to
familiarize yourself with intricacies far beyond the understanding of mortal
men that you're not an absolute Technic and Mindstorms freak :)
-Tom McD.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Uh Oh... (was Traffic Error )
|
| I want you to know Todd that I myself did not post the message to which I'm replying. I was just checking this group and saw it there, but didn't remember writing it. So I checked it, and it's the exact same post as the post from before from me (I (...) (26 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Traffic Error
|
| (...) Thanks to both of you for reporting & documenting this. Let's see what we can find out. 2:25pm PDT today equals 5:25pm EDT, equals 924297900 seconds past the epoch, so what's in the activity log snapshots at that time...? Hmm, nothing odd (...) (26 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
27 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
