Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[H.J. Lu]

For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
I the only one who has  experienced it?

-- 
H.J.

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 27 January 2015 at 16:02, H.J. Lu wrote:
> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
> I the only one who has  experienced it?

No, everyone sees it. Spammers are trying to write to the wiki or
something and are DOSing the machine.

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Steve Ellcey]

On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 08:02 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
> I the only one who has  experienced it?

I got some timeouts while updating my glibc git repo yesterday.
I had never run into that before.

Steve Ellcey
sellcey@imgtec.com

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Joel Sherrill]

On January 27, 2015 10:04:51 AM CST, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 27 January 2015 at 16:02, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
>> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
>> I the only one who has  experienced it?
>
>No, everyone sees it. Spammers are trying to write to the wiki or
>something and are DOSing the machine.

Yesterday I was teaching a class and 7 of us were fetching newlib from git. It was around 20 CST but once we cloned, we were done.

I hope we were not the DOS.

--joel

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Jeff Law]

On 01/27/15 09:20, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 08:02 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
>> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
>> I the only one who has  experienced it?
>
> I got some timeouts while updating my glibc git repo yesterday.
> I had never run into that before.
We're having some load problems; looks like we're short of memory from 
occasionally looking at the system over the last week or so.  Mornings, 
EST are definitely a bad time.  Spammers may be making things worse.

I haven't heard back from Frank WRT whether or not we can add more 
memory to the existing system.  That would be a stopgap as the machine 
is nearing its end of life (we typically need to update the system 
roughly ever 3 years).

jeff

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Jeff Law]

On 01/27/15 09:20, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 08:02 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
>> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
>> I the only one who has  experienced it?
>
> I got some timeouts while updating my glibc git repo yesterday.
> I had never run into that before.
Are you using anonymous mode, or ssh-authenticated?  The former is 
usually throttled as the load rises, the latter is not.

jeff

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Steve Ellcey]

On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 09:36 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 01/27/15 09:20, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 08:02 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
> >> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
> >> I the only one who has  experienced it?
> >
> > I got some timeouts while updating my glibc git repo yesterday.
> > I had never run into that before.
> Are you using anonymous mode, or ssh-authenticated?  The former is 
> usually throttled as the load rises, the latter is not.
> 
> jeff

I was using anonymous mode.

Steve Ellcey

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Joel Sherrill]

On January 27, 2015 11:39:13 AM CST, Steve Ellcey <sellcey@imgtec.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 09:36 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 01/27/15 09:20, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 08:02 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
>> >> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
>> >> I the only one who has  experienced it?
>> >
>> > I got some timeouts while updating my glibc git repo yesterday.
>> > I had never run into that before.
>> Are you using anonymous mode, or ssh-authenticated?  The former is 
>> usually throttled as the load rises, the latter is not.
>> 
>> jeff
>
>I was using anonymous mode.

We were also using anonymous mode. 

>Steve Ellcey

--joel

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Joel Sherrill]

On 1/27/2015 1:31 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
> On January 27, 2015 11:39:13 AM CST, Steve Ellcey <sellcey@imgtec.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 09:36 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 01/27/15 09:20, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 08:02 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>>> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
>>>>> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
>>>>> I the only one who has  experienced it?
>>>> I got some timeouts while updating my glibc git repo yesterday.
>>>> I had never run into that before.
>>> Are you using anonymous mode, or ssh-authenticated?  The former is 
>>> usually throttled as the load rises, the latter is not.
>>>
>>> jeff
>> I was using anonymous mode.
> We were also using anonymous mode. 
>
FWIW we switched the RTEMS tool build instructions from using
newlib CVS to git because anonymous CVS was unreliable even
a few months ago.

It isn't a real fix but Jeff J is cutting monthly newlib snapshots
for us now and we are switching to refer to those with any
needed patches. Maybe that will help reduce the load some.
>> Steve Ellcey
> --joel

-- 
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available                (256) 722-9985

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[David Edelsohn]

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 01/27/15 09:20, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 08:02 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> For the past couple days, gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org is
>>> quite slow for me when accessing git and bugzilla.  Am
>>> I the only one who has  experienced it?
>>
>>
>> I got some timeouts while updating my glibc git repo yesterday.
>> I had never run into that before.
>
> We're having some load problems; looks like we're short of memory from
> occasionally looking at the system over the last week or so.  Mornings, EST
> are definitely a bad time.  Spammers may be making things worse.
>
> I haven't heard back from Frank WRT whether or not we can add more memory to
> the existing system.  That would be a stopgap as the machine is nearing its
> end of life (we typically need to update the system roughly ever 3 years).

If a new system is procured, we need to perform the transition in a
more timely manner so that the new system is not idle for a year like
last time.

I thought that there was more than one system.  Is it possible to
divide the work between multiple systems?

Thanks, David

Re: Slow gcc.gnu.org/sourceware.org?

[Jeff Law]

On 01/27/15 14:22, David Edelsohn wrote:
> If a new system is procured, we need to perform the transition in a
> more timely manner so that the new system is not idle for a year like
> last time.
>
> I thought that there was more than one system.  Is it possible to
> divide the work between multiple systems?
There's minimal splitting of services.  The tight integration between 
the services makes that nontrivial.  I recall some plans with more 
splitting of services, but I think Frank & Chris burnt out with the last 
upgrade before any of that could be done.

Word from Frank is that there's someone at the colo that will assess 
what memory is needed and try to scrounge some up.  If none can be 
found, it'll be ordered.  There are slots available for expansion.

It's a certainty we will need to upgrade that machine, the only question 
is when.  Given the amount of time an upgrade takes for the volunteers, 
I'm really hoping the extra memory gives us enough headroom to get 
through this year.

And yes, the year delay between delivery and setup of the new server was 
bad, very bad.

jeff