t.e.o upgraded to 0.11 beta1

Hi,

I've just upgraded t.e.o to Trac 0.11 beta1. So far
everything appears 
to be working but please let me know if you notice anything
broken by 
this change.

Cheers,
Jonas

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Trac Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-devgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
trac-dev-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://
groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

-On [20071230 14:35], Jonas Borgström (jonasedgewall.com) wrote:
>I've just upgraded t.e.o to Trac 0.11 beta1. So far
everything appears 
>to be working but please let me know if you notice
anything broken by 
>this change.

I found a small issue with Opera, can anyone else with a
0.11 beta verify
this:

Go to newticket, click the component drop down menu:

For Opera 9.24 I see that the selected option jumps to the
top choice. Even if
I select another option, click somewhere else in the chrome
to unfocus from
the drop down menu and then click the drop down menu again
it will jump to the
top option 'attachment'
For Opera 9.50 watch the 'general' selection get cleared.
Even if I select
another option, click somewhere else in the chrome to
unfocus from the drop
down menu and then click the drop down menu again it will
clear the selection
again.

Under Firefox 2 this does not occur and general stays
selected.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
<asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル
ウェルヴェン
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/
In every stone sleeps a crystal...

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Trac Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-devgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
trac-dev-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://
groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

> I found a small issue with Opera, can anyone else with
a 0.11 beta verify
> this:
>
> Go to newticket, click the component drop down menu:
>
> For Opera 9.24 I see that the selected option jumps to
the top choice.  
> Even if
> I select another option, click somewhere else in the
chrome to unfocus  
> from
> the drop down menu and then click the drop down menu
again it will jump  
> to the
> top option 'attachment'

I can confirm this for 9.24. But I only see this behaviour
on t.e.o, not  
on my local testsite. Even if I add enough components so
that a scrollbar  
is displayed, it works correctly. The only difference is
that on my  
testsite, there is enough room underneath the selectbox so
that the  
options are displayed below it, whereas on t.e.o. the
options are  
displayed above the select box. To me this indicates a Opera
bug, not a  
trac bug?

I noticed another detail however. When I add components in
the admin page,  
then click new ticket, the new components are not displayed
in the  
dropdown until I do a refresh of the whole page. Cache
problem or  
something?

- Endre

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Trac Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-devgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
trac-dev-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://
groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

FYI t.e.o is now running 0.10 again since 0.11 apparently
has some 
memory usage issues. Last night the server grinded to a halt
when a 
bunch of trac fcgi processes each allocating more than 600MB
resident 
memory.

I've not yet identified which pages require this much memory
but I would 
not be surprised if it's some of the more expensive
versioncontrol 
pages.

As far as I know memory allocated by the python interpreter
is almost 
never returned to the operating system so a single memory
hungry page 
can case this type of problem when using long running
processes such as 
fastcgi and tracd.

As a comparison with Trac 0.10 each trac process on t.e.o
never seems to 
allocate more than 100MB. And this server is 64bit so memory
usage 
should be even lower on 32bit systems.

Some relevant reading:
http://wingolog.org/archives/2007/11/27/reduci
ng-the-footprint-of- 
python-applications

Cheers,
Jonas

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Trac Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-devgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
trac-dev-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://
groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Just as a point of comparison, this is from dev.laptop.org:

   PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+
 COMMAND
22732 www-data  15   0 2625m 2.5g 3548 S    0 32.2 317:02.53
trac.fcgi
15142 www-data  15   0  511m 407m 3536 S    0  5.1  46:46.00
trac.fcgi
23190 www-data  15   0  437m 393m 3524 S    0  4.9  42:09.89
trac.fcgi
19822 www-data  15   0  216m 142m 3516 S    0  1.8  13:06.86
trac.fcgi

--Noah Kantrowitz

On Jan 1, 2008, at 5:09 AM, Jonas Borgström wrote:

>
> FYI t.e.o is now running 0.10 again since 0.11
apparently has some
> memory usage issues. Last night the server grinded to a
halt when a
> bunch of trac fcgi processes each allocating more than
600MB resident
> memory.
>
> I've not yet identified which pages require this much
memory but I  
> would
> not be surprised if it's some of the more expensive
versioncontrol
> pages.
>
> As far as I know memory allocated by the python
interpreter is almost
> never returned to the operating system so a single
memory hungry page
> can case this type of problem when using long running
processes such  
> as
> fastcgi and tracd.
>
> As a comparison with Trac 0.10 each trac process on
t.e.o never  
> seems to
> allocate more than 100MB. And this server is 64bit so
memory usage
> should be even lower on 32bit systems.
>
> Some relevant reading:
> http://wingolog.org/archives/2007/11/27/reduci
ng-the-footprint-of-
> python-applications
>
> Cheers,
> Jonas
>
> >
>


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Trac Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to trac-devgooglegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
trac-dev-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://
groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---