Author: Daniel Shawul
Date: 06:37:05 07/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 22, 2004 at 09:11:57, James Swafford wrote: >On July 22, 2004 at 01:38:56, Daniel Shawul wrote: > >>On July 21, 2004 at 12:21:38, James Swafford wrote: >> >>>First, my apologies for having the service down this long already. >>>I had hoped to have it back up by now. >>> >>>The search engine lives on a production web server that runs >>>a few websites and email for a small ISP that's jointly >>>owned by me and two others. One of our clients has been complaining >>>about getting 404 errors _immediately_ after requesting a page >>>from their site. At first I didn't think it was our problem, but >>>over time I became convinced it was. >>> >>>After scratching our heads for a while, we thought we'd stop the >>>search engine to see what, if any, effect that would have. The >>>problem struck infrequently enough that it wasn't immediately obvious; >>>we'd have to 'wait and see'. Two (three?) weeks later, there have >>>been no complaints. >>> >>>Andrei has done a great job with the search engine, but it does >>>have a (manageable) bug. Over time, it forks more and more client >>>processes and the load average goes through the roof. I think the >>>high load average was the cause of the 404 errors. >>> >>>That's really not that big a deal: a 'killall ccc_client' here and >>>there takes care of things (that could even be cron'd). Andrei >>>suggested looking into the 'nice' command. >>> >>>To make a long story short, here's the deal: the other two >>>that run this business with me aren't crazy about hosting the >>>search engine on production equipment. They don't want it back >>>on. BUT... that machine is really mine. We are ordering two >>>new machines (today). Once set up, we will migrate the production >>>stuff off of my equipment. At that point, I'll be able to turn >>>the search engine back on. >>> >>>Until then, I can probably turn it on in the evenings (I'm >> >> for me this is equivalent to nothing. Can't work at night. >> Please let us know if there is any better solution. >> daniel >> > >Note that I'm on EST: you posted this at 1:38 AM EST. And that's just when i am getting out of work. I am at GMT + 3 and the server doesn't work for me when i am writing this message. daniel > >-- >James > > > >>>on EST), but I'm not going to go behind their backs by turning >>>it on during the business day. >>> >>>Just an update for those interested.... >>> >>>-- >>>James
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.