Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • Oct 12 15:59
    niemyjski commented #459
  • Oct 12 15:57
    niemyjski edited #459
  • Oct 12 12:54
    niemyjski synchronize #452
  • Oct 12 12:54

    niemyjski on elastic7

    Fixed serializer null reference… Fixed all Swagger issues. (compare)

  • Oct 12 12:26
    niemyjski synchronize #452
  • Oct 12 12:26

    niemyjski on elastic7

    Updated to latest foundatio rep… (compare)

  • Oct 12 12:24
    niemyjski synchronize #452
  • Oct 12 12:24

    niemyjski on elastic7

    Fixed elasticsearch serializer … (compare)

  • Oct 12 11:01
    wmowm opened #459
  • Oct 11 11:21
    niemyjski commented #458
  • Oct 10 21:18
    kiquenet opened #458
  • Oct 10 13:30
    niemyjski updated the wiki
  • Oct 10 09:20
  • Oct 10 03:36
  • Oct 09 15:54
    john-roland closed #456
  • Oct 09 15:54
    john-roland commented #456
  • Oct 09 14:12
    niemyjski labeled #457
  • Oct 09 14:12
    niemyjski labeled #457
  • Oct 09 14:12
    niemyjski commented #457
  • Oct 09 14:10
    12371601 commented #450
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
I need it like every day
Screen Shot 2016-04-11 at 11.04.35 AM.png
@srijken I’m taking a look into this
seems like when I click between two different errors multiple times I get a series of them
Eric J. Smith
@ejsmith
yeah, I think that is definitely useful
and should be quick
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
yeah
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
@ejsmith @srijken
it appears we are doing
            hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ TotalPhysicalMemory.GetHashCode();
            hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ AvailablePhysicalMemory.GetHashCode();
            hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ ProcessMemorySize.GetHashCode();
            hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ (ThreadName == null ? 0 : ThreadName.GetHashCode());
            hashCode = (hashCode * 397) ^ (ThreadId == null ? 0 : ThreadId.GetHashCode());
which the memory one for process memory is changing by .1mb and causing it to not be deduplicated
wondering if thread id is changing it as well
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
hmm
total memory is fine
but I don’t think the memory and thread ones should be there
I’m seeing reference id interferring as it’s stored in a cookie
so it’s changing that on request info
should we remove cookies from the gethashcode logic too
?
Eric J. Smith
@ejsmith
no
why would we do that?
if the cookies are different, don’t we want to see them?
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
because were updating the lastreferenceid cookie value and then it’s not deduped
yeah I guess but if everything else matches then it’s kind of a dup no?
Eric J. Smith
@ejsmith
yeah, that sucks
if we can skip that one
that would be good.
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
only
yeah I’ll add logic to skip that key on gethashcode
you think we should remove the threadid,thread name, available memory and process memory size from gethashcode
to me those are things that could change alot
but having those may help track down multithreaded issues
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Checking event: with hash: -1999577676
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Checking event: with hash: -25846723
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Checking event: with hash: -25846723
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Checking event: with hash: -688792890
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Checking event: with hash: -25846723
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Checking event: with hash: -1999577676
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Enqueueing event with hash:-1999577676 to cache.
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Enqueueing event with hash:-25846723 to cache.
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Enqueueing event with hash:-1999577676 to cache.
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Enqueueing event with hash:-25846723 to cache.
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Enqueueing event with hash:-688792890 to cache.
DuplicateCheckerPlugin: Enqueueing event with hash:-25846723 to cache.
were using a concurrent queue
and it’s almost like it’s blocking
Eric J. Smith
@ejsmith
I think removing those is reasonable
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
yeah I removed them now running into some kind of issue with the above
seems like there getting blocked when you queue up a bunch of them and then they are allowed
Eric J. Smith
@ejsmith
don’t know what you mean
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
look at the above log message
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
updated the unit test and it’s failing
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
            c.UseLogger(new XunitExceptionlessLog(_writer));
:D
got awesome logging now in our client unit tests
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
Checking event: with hash: 738490750
Checking event: with hash: -717263284
Enqueueing event with hash:-717263284 to cache.
Checking event: with hash: -717263284
Enqueueing event with hash:-717263284 to cache.
Checking event: with hash: -717263284
Enqueueing event with hash:-717263284 to cache.
Enqueueing event with hash:738490750 to cache.
Checking event: with hash: -717263284
Checking event: with hash: -717263284
def having a threading issue
with the plugin
changed the forloop to a parallel 4 and everything broke loose
Blake Niemyjski
@niemyjski
@srijken would you be willing to help me look into why the concurrent ones are failing? I added unit tests with improved logging
I think we might need to add some locking code in there