[Box-Admins] box3.squeak.org off line - HELP neeeded

[David T. Lewis]

On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 10:23:06AM -0500, Chris Muller wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 07:54:05PM -0500, Chris Muller wrote:
> >> I just deployed an updated image for "new trunk" at
> >> box4.squeak.org:8888/trunk.  This is the one that uses the Magma
> >> backend.  I haven't done any benchmarks but the response time seems
> >> pretty snappy, even compared to regular source.squeak.org.  Could be
> >> due to Cog, the Magma backend, or box4 being under less load than
> >> box3.
> >
> > It might be all of the above. I'm thinking that the priority for the
> > squeaksource.com image is to first get it up to date to the level of
> > source.squeak.org, then at our leisure we can bring both of them together
> > up to a the level that you are demonstarting with Cog and Magma. But
> > the main thing is to get squeaksource.com stable, which is not yet the case.
> 
> source.squeak.org is getting slow too, and it runs on an old image.
> The work I've done to bring it to a trunk image under Cog is based on
> the source.squeak.org image, and really not that many changes.
> 
> > It turns out that the following snippet from the workspace that SCG provided
> > took care of the problem for now:
> >
> >         " kill runaway processes "
> >         ProcessBrowser open.
> >         Process allInstances do: [ :each |
> >                 each priority = 30 ifTrue: [
> >                         each terminate ] ].
> 
> OMG!  No wonder SS has so many problems if it is so unloved that
> someone would arbitrarily kill processes based on their priority!
> 

That's just something I found in the workspace that came with the image.
I figured it must be there for a reason, so I tried it and it "fixed"
the problem.

You are right about one thing - SS was not getting much love. Even I, who
knew absolutely nothing about SqueakSource before I volunteered to move
it, was able to fix some of the worst problems. That's why I am confident
that we can get it running reliably once we have given it a little bit
of long-overdue attention.

> > So I'm guessing that some Seaside handler got wedged, presumably concurrent
> > with an excessive memory usage condition, and it probably failed in some way
> > that did not let the garbage collector clean up the mess.
> 
> SS forks the email out to Project subscribers at priority 30. See
> SSEMailSubscription>>#versionAdded:to:.  I wonder whether that's what
> those were?

Outbound mail notification from squeaksource.com is disabled, so that
should not have been a concern.

Note, I still need help from someone with access to box2 to enable mail
delivery. I don't want to install an entire mail system on box3 just
to handle notifications from squeaksource on box3, so I expect that
configuring box2 to accept smtp from box3 would be the right thing
to do.

Dave