Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Adam Sjøgren]

  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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Tassilo Horn]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Adam Sjøgren]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Ted Zlatanov]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Adam Sjøgren]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Ted Zlatanov]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Adam Sjøgren]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Ted Zlatanov]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Adam Sjøgren]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Ted Zlatanov]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Ted Zlatanov]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Tassilo Horn]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Ted Zlatanov]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Adam Sjøgren]

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

Re: Trying to enter a group: "registry max-hard size limit reached"

[Adam Sjøgren]

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