* Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" @ 2011-05-08 21:04 Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 6:37 ` Tassilo Horn 2011-05-09 8:47 ` Adam Sjøgren 0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-08 21:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding Hi. When I tried entering a (gwene) group, I got this message: "registry max-hard size limit reached" and Gnus didn't open the group. I am at a loss as to what I am supposed to do... I have these lines in my .gnus (possibly) related to the registry: ; Registry: (setq gnus-registry-install t) (setq gnus-registry-max-entries 5000 gnus-registry-use-long-group-names t) ; spam.el: (gnus-registry-initialize) (spam-initialize) (setq spam-log-to-registry t [...] spam-unregister-on-reregister t Best regards, Adam -- "I think I've learned by now Adam Sjøgren There's never an easy way" asjo@koldfront.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-08 21:04 Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 6:37 ` Tassilo Horn 2011-05-09 8:47 ` Adam Sjøgren 1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Tassilo Horn @ 2011-05-09 6:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) writes: Hi Adam, > When I tried entering a (gwene) group, I got this message: > > "registry max-hard size limit reached" > > and Gnus didn't open the group. Hm, `registry-insert' checks an assertion that the db has to contain less entries than `gnus-registry-max-entries'. If not, you get that error you've encountered. At a quick glance, I think the method `registry-prune' is in charge for cleaning old data from the db, so that new entries can be inserted. However, that isn't called from anywhere, AFAIKS. I think (registry-prune gnus-registry-db) should do the trick. Bye, Tassilo -- Sent from my Emacs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-08 21:04 Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 6:37 ` Tassilo Horn @ 2011-05-09 8:47 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 10:54 ` Ted Zlatanov 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 8:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Sun, 08 May 2011 23:04:23 +0200, Adam wrote: > "registry max-hard size limit reached" > and Gnus didn't open the group. This morning when I tried to start Gnus, I got the same message and Gnus wouldn't start. I have removed the .gnus.registry.* files and was then able to start Gnus again. This is with No Gnus 4872ab1e. Best regards, Adam -- "I think I've learned by now Adam Sjøgren There's never an easy way" asjo@koldfront.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 8:47 ` Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 10:54 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 15:41 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 17:52 ` Ted Zlatanov 0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 10:47:06 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> On Sun, 08 May 2011 23:04:23 +0200, Adam wrote: >> "registry max-hard size limit reached" >> and Gnus didn't open the group. AS> This morning when I tried to start Gnus, I got the same message and Gnus AS> wouldn't start. AS> I have removed the .gnus.registry.* files and was then able to start AS> Gnus again. AS> This is with No Gnus 4872ab1e. As Tassilo said, increase `gnus-registry-max-entries' until I fix it to call `registry-prune'. No need to remove the registry (though that works too, certainly). Thanks Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 10:54 ` Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 15:41 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 16:26 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 17:52 ` Ted Zlatanov 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 05:54:39 -0500, Ted wrote: > As Tassilo said, increase `gnus-registry-max-entries' (He didn't actually say that... :-)) > until I fix it to call `registry-prune'. No need to remove the > registry (though that works too, certainly). I have just turned it off; it is of no discernable use to me anyway. Best regards, Adam -- "I think I've learned by now Adam Sjøgren There's never an easy way" asjo@koldfront.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 15:41 ` Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 16:26 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 16:50 ` Adam Sjøgren 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 16:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 17:41:03 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> On Mon, 09 May 2011 05:54:39 -0500, Ted wrote: >> until I fix it to call `registry-prune'. No need to remove the >> registry (though that works too, certainly). AS> I have just turned it off; it is of no discernable use to me anyway. That's interesting. You must have turned it on for a reason, right? It's off by default. Did it get turned on accidentally? Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 16:26 ` Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 16:50 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 17:55 ` Ted Zlatanov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 11:26:33 -0500, Ted wrote: > On Mon, 09 May 2011 17:41:03 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> I have just turned it off; it is of no discernable use to me anyway. > That's interesting. You must have turned it on for a reason, right? Yes; it is in the vicinity of my spam.el configuration, so it was probably something related to that. I am pretty sure that I set gnus-registry-max-entries because the registry file got very large and it took a while to load, but I have never experienced problems with this setting before. I don't have my configuration files under tight version control, so when I can't remember why, I can't really get closer to the reason. > It's off by default. Did it get turned on accidentally? No, I turned it on on purpose years ago (as evidenced by the configuration-snippets I posted earlier; in <877ha09a5k.fsf@topper.koldfront.dk>). Best regards, Adam -- "I'm always interested in avoiding learning new Adam Sjøgren things." asjo@koldfront.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 16:50 ` Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 17:55 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 17:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 18:50:31 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> On Mon, 09 May 2011 11:26:33 -0500, Ted wrote: >> On Mon, 09 May 2011 17:41:03 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> I have just turned it off; it is of no discernable use to me anyway. >> That's interesting. You must have turned it on for a reason, right? AS> Yes; it is in the vicinity of my spam.el configuration, so it was AS> probably something related to that. OK, I remember spam.el uses the Gnus registry to track if an article has been spam-processed or not. AS> I am pretty sure that I set gnus-registry-max-entries because the AS> registry file got very large and it took a while to load, but I have AS> never experienced problems with this setting before. The load+save is much faster now that it's entirely managed by EIEIO with a native hashtable, but certainly if you want to save memory and speed Gnus up, it's better to turn the Gnus registry off. >> It's off by default. Did it get turned on accidentally? AS> No, I turned it on on purpose years ago (as evidenced by the AS> configuration-snippets I posted earlier; in AS> <877ha09a5k.fsf@topper.koldfront.dk>). OK, I was just worried :) Thanks for checking. Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 17:55 ` Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-10 17:45 ` Ted Zlatanov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-10 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 12:55:00 -0500, Ted wrote: AS> I am pretty sure that I set gnus-registry-max-entries because the AS> registry file got very large and it took a while to load, but I have AS> never experienced problems with this setting before. > The load+save is much faster now that it's entirely managed by EIEIO > with a native hashtable, but certainly if you want to save memory and > speed Gnus up, it's better to turn the Gnus registry off. The speed-up is great, but if it makes Gnus stop working when the registry reaches the size limit, all the speed in the world ain't worth so much... Best regards, Adam -- "I'm always interested in avoiding learning new Adam Sjøgren things." asjo@koldfront.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-10 17:45 ` Ted Zlatanov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-10 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Tue, 10 May 2011 12:29:03 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> On Mon, 09 May 2011 12:55:00 -0500, Ted wrote: AS> I am pretty sure that I set gnus-registry-max-entries because the AS> registry file got very large and it took a while to load, but I have AS> never experienced problems with this setting before. >> The load+save is much faster now that it's entirely managed by EIEIO >> with a native hashtable, but certainly if you want to save memory and >> speed Gnus up, it's better to turn the Gnus registry off. AS> The speed-up is great, but if it makes Gnus stop working when the AS> registry reaches the size limit, all the speed in the world ain't worth AS> so much... I think I've fixed it with the last commits so the pruning will DTRT to the hard and soft limits. There is no sort function in gnus-registry yet so semi-random entries will be removed, but I'll add that too when I get a chance. On Tue, 10 May 2011 12:29:15 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> On Mon, 09 May 2011 12:52:02 -0500, Ted wrote: >> Now the code calls `registry-prune' but will still fail if the registry >> is full. I think that's the right thing to do, though I could ask the >> user if he wants to increase `gnus-registry-max-entries'. AS> So how does it compare to before the registry rewrite? The way it was AS> handled then Just Worked(tm) for me for years, even with the small value AS> I had set... We're back to that situation now. But it will always take up memory and slows down article copy/move/spool operations. So if you need registry article marks, spam tracking through the registry (a feature I don't think anyone needs), or splitting articles to the parent reference's group, use it, but otherwise don't bother. Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 10:54 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 15:41 ` Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-09 17:52 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 19:44 ` Tassilo Horn 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 1 sibling, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 17:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 05:54:39 -0500 Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> wrote: TZ> On Mon, 09 May 2011 10:47:06 +0200 asjo@koldfront.dk (Adam Sjøgren) wrote: AS> On Sun, 08 May 2011 23:04:23 +0200, Adam wrote: >>> "registry max-hard size limit reached" >>> and Gnus didn't open the group. AS> This morning when I tried to start Gnus, I got the same message and Gnus AS> wouldn't start. AS> I have removed the .gnus.registry.* files and was then able to start AS> Gnus again. AS> This is with No Gnus 4872ab1e. TZ> As Tassilo said, increase `gnus-registry-max-entries' until I fix it to TZ> call `registry-prune'. No need to remove the registry (though that TZ> works too, certainly). Now the code calls `registry-prune' but will still fail if the registry is full. I think that's the right thing to do, though I could ask the user if he wants to increase `gnus-registry-max-entries'. Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 17:52 ` Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 19:44 ` Tassilo Horn 2011-05-09 20:03 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Tassilo Horn @ 2011-05-09 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ted Zlatanov; +Cc: ding Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes: > TZ> As Tassilo said, increase `gnus-registry-max-entries' until I fix > TZ> it to call `registry-prune'. No need to remove the registry > TZ> (though that works too, certainly). > > Now the code calls `registry-prune' but will still fail if the > registry is full. I think that's the right thing to do, though I > could ask the user if he wants to increase > `gnus-registry-max-entries'. Why can it still be full after pruning? IMO, if I set the registry size to be at maximum 1000 articles long, I'd expect it to work as a LRU cache... Bye, Tassilo -- Sent from my Emacs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 19:44 ` Tassilo Horn @ 2011-05-09 20:03 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-09 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 21:44:40 +0200 Tassilo Horn <tassilo@member.fsf.org> wrote: TH> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes: TZ> As Tassilo said, increase `gnus-registry-max-entries' until I fix TZ> it to call `registry-prune'. No need to remove the registry TZ> (though that works too, certainly). >> >> Now the code calls `registry-prune' but will still fail if the >> registry is full. I think that's the right thing to do, though I >> could ask the user if he wants to increase >> `gnus-registry-max-entries'. TH> Why can it still be full after pruning? IMO, if I set the registry size TH> to be at maximum 1000 articles long, I'd expect it to work as a LRU TH> cache... Yes, but rather than losing the data the user may want to raise the hard limit. So we could be friendlier before `registry-prune' goes in. Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 20:03 ` Ted Zlatanov @ 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-10 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 15:03:32 -0500, Ted wrote: > On Mon, 09 May 2011 21:44:40 +0200 Tassilo Horn <tassilo@member.fsf.org> wrote: TH> Why can it still be full after pruning? IMO, if I set the registry TH> size to be at maximum 1000 articles long, I'd expect it to work as a TH> LRU cache... > Yes, but rather than losing the data the user may want to raise the hard > limit. Does that mean that the registry can still be full after pruning, or not? > So we could be friendlier before `registry-prune' goes in. So "hard" should mean "medium"? Would you then add a "really hard" limit as well? I would expect a hard limit to be exactly that - the maximum that won't be exceeded. And if a stupid user, like me, sets it too low for his own good, well, tough luck, don't go frobbing variables you don't understand, kiddo. Best regards, Adam -- "Last year I was very tired." Adam Sjøgren asjo@koldfront.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
* Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" 2011-05-09 17:52 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 19:44 ` Tassilo Horn @ 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread From: Adam Sjøgren @ 2011-05-10 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ding On Mon, 09 May 2011 12:52:02 -0500, Ted wrote: > Now the code calls `registry-prune' but will still fail if the registry > is full. I think that's the right thing to do, though I could ask the > user if he wants to increase `gnus-registry-max-entries'. So how does it compare to before the registry rewrite? The way it was handled then Just Worked(tm) for me for years, even with the small value I had set... Best regards, Adam -- "Last year I was very tired." Adam Sjøgren asjo@koldfront.dk ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-10 17:45 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-05-08 21:04 Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached" Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 6:37 ` Tassilo Horn 2011-05-09 8:47 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 10:54 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 15:41 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 16:26 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 16:50 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-09 17:55 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-10 17:45 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 17:52 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-09 19:44 ` Tassilo Horn 2011-05-09 20:03 ` Ted Zlatanov 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren 2011-05-10 10:29 ` Adam Sjøgren
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).