You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to slide-user@jakarta.apache.org by Mirko Froehlich <mf...@digitalchocolate.com> on 2004/12/03 22:34:41 UTC
main branch vs. 2.1 release branch
How stable would you consider the Slide main branch at this point? What
are some of the significant differences between this and 2.1?
I am still doing my concurrency testing, and unfortunately I think I
spoke too soon when I said that everything runs fine with caching
enabled. I still get deadlocks under Slide 2.1. Sometimes it deadlocks
very soon, other times it takes about 1 hour or so. For some reason, I
no longer get stacktraces in the Tomcat logs.
Initial testing using the main branch from CVS suggests that this
version might be more stable, as I have yet to run into this deadlock
problem. But of course I am concerned about actually running with a
development release. I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.
-Mirko
Re: main branch vs. 2.1 release branch
Posted by Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>.
More general: the Slide main branch has new features going in which
always tends to reduce stability and things continue to change. Of
course in 2005 it will freeze with the first beta and will finally
become 2.2.
Differences so far are improved concurrency, improved speed for MySQL,
timeouts in caching and much more.
I do not thing for your specific issue the main branch will be better,
but if it turns out your problems are still related to Slide there is
much more potential for further changes in the CVS Head.
E.g. I was just suggesting in the dev list to add an option to
silently redo a request internally without telling the client in case
of a deadlock. This would be a new feature and would not go into 2.1
maintenance releases...
Oliver
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:34:41 -0800, Mirko Froehlich
<mf...@digitalchocolate.com> wrote:
> How stable would you consider the Slide main branch at this point? What
> are some of the significant differences between this and 2.1?
>
> I am still doing my concurrency testing, and unfortunately I think I
> spoke too soon when I said that everything runs fine with caching
> enabled. I still get deadlocks under Slide 2.1. Sometimes it deadlocks
> very soon, other times it takes about 1 hour or so. For some reason, I
> no longer get stacktraces in the Tomcat logs.
>
> Initial testing using the main branch from CVS suggests that this
> version might be more stable, as I have yet to run into this deadlock
> problem. But of course I am concerned about actually running with a
> development release. I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.
>
> -Mirko
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: main branch vs. 2.1 release branch
Posted by Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>.
I never worked with 4.0, so there is nothing 4.1 resolved for me. It
just worked. Just try it, you can install it and let it run in half an
hour.
Oliver
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 18:14:55 -0800, Mirko Froehlich
<mf...@digitalchocolate.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion, I will definitely try that. Do you know which
> particular improvements in MySQL 4.1 would have made a difference?
>
> When you say it worked for you, which specific issue did it resolve?
>
> -Mirko
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 16:02, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
>
>
> I would try upgrading to MySQL 4.1. It worked fine for me. Oliver On Fri, 03
> Dec 2004 13:34:41 -0800, Mirko Froehlich <mf...@digitalchocolate.com>
> wrote: > How stable would you consider the Slide main branch at this point?
> What > are some of the significant differences between this and 2.1? > > I
> am still doing my concurrency testing, and unfortunately I think I > spoke
> too soon when I said that everything runs fine with caching > enabled. I
> still get deadlocks under Slide 2.1. Sometimes it deadlocks > very soon,
> other times it takes about 1 hour or so. For some reason, I > no longer get
> stacktraces in the Tomcat logs. > > Initial testing using the main branch
> from CVS suggests that this > version might be more stable, as I have yet to
> run into this deadlock > problem. But of course I am concerned about
> actually running with a > development release. I'd appreciate any thoughts
> on this. > > -Mirko > >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To
> unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For
> additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: main branch vs. 2.1 release branch
Posted by Mirko Froehlich <mf...@digitalchocolate.com>.
Thanks for the suggestion, I will definitely try that. Do you know which
particular improvements in MySQL 4.1 would have made a difference?
When you say it worked for you, which specific issue did it resolve?
-Mirko
On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 16:02, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> I would try upgrading to MySQL 4.1. It worked fine for me.
>
> Oliver
>
>
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:34:41 -0800, Mirko Froehlich
> <mf...@digitalchocolate.com> wrote:
> > How stable would you consider the Slide main branch at this point? What
> > are some of the significant differences between this and 2.1?
> >
> > I am still doing my concurrency testing, and unfortunately I think I
> > spoke too soon when I said that everything runs fine with caching
> > enabled. I still get deadlocks under Slide 2.1. Sometimes it deadlocks
> > very soon, other times it takes about 1 hour or so. For some reason, I
> > no longer get stacktraces in the Tomcat logs.
> >
> > Initial testing using the main branch from CVS suggests that this
> > version might be more stable, as I have yet to run into this deadlock
> > problem. But of course I am concerned about actually running with a
> > development release. I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.
> >
> > -Mirko
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
Re: main branch vs. 2.1 release branch
Posted by Oliver Zeigermann <ol...@gmail.com>.
I would try upgrading to MySQL 4.1. It worked fine for me.
Oliver
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:34:41 -0800, Mirko Froehlich
<mf...@digitalchocolate.com> wrote:
> How stable would you consider the Slide main branch at this point? What
> are some of the significant differences between this and 2.1?
>
> I am still doing my concurrency testing, and unfortunately I think I
> spoke too soon when I said that everything runs fine with caching
> enabled. I still get deadlocks under Slide 2.1. Sometimes it deadlocks
> very soon, other times it takes about 1 hour or so. For some reason, I
> no longer get stacktraces in the Tomcat logs.
>
> Initial testing using the main branch from CVS suggests that this
> version might be more stable, as I have yet to run into this deadlock
> problem. But of course I am concerned about actually running with a
> development release. I'd appreciate any thoughts on this.
>
> -Mirko
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: slide-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: slide-user-help@jakarta.apache.org