#musicbrainz-devel

/

      • ariscop joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22318, 2015

      • Gentlecat joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22344, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        Project musicbrainz-server_beta build #617: SUCCESS in 18 min: http://ci.musicbrainz.org/job/musicbrainz-server_…

        • 2015-08-11 22345, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        Michael Wiencek: Make the initial target type in the relationship editor dialog consistent

        • 2015-08-11 22330, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        Project musicbrainz-server_master build #171: SUCCESS in 18 min: http://ci.musicbrainz.org/job/musicbrainz-server_…

        • 2015-08-11 22331, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: Return early from Data::Relationship::exists if no link is found

        • 2015-08-11 22332, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: Factor test out of 'all'

        • 2015-08-11 22333, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: Relationship credits don't determine uniqueness

        • 2015-08-11 22334, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: MBS-2477: Relationship edits should track merges

        • 2015-08-11 22335, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * reosarevok: mbs-8498: allow merging entities in a collection

        • 2015-08-11 22336, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: Fix Edit::Medium::AddDiscID previewing

        • 2015-08-11 22337, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: Don't forget to allow code attribute introspection

        • 2015-08-11 22338, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: Require MooseX::Role::Parameterized >= 1.03

        • 2015-08-11 22339, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        * Michael Wiencek: Don't try to load "0" IDs in historic EditReleaseLanguage edits

        • 2015-08-11 22302, 2015

      • Han_
        bitmap: Have you used the new VM yet? I can't seem to run any commands on the 'recording' table. Even a simple count command will freeze my computer.

        • 2015-08-11 22336, 2015

      • Han_
        Count, meaning trying to get the number of records in the table.

        • 2015-08-11 22306, 2015

      • Han_
        I compared the new VM and the old VM, and the size of the two tables seem to be similar ~2.9 GB.

        • 2015-08-11 22332, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        Michael Wiencek: Revert "Replace dynamic require() for jed data with static import"

        • 2015-08-11 22336, 2015

      • bitmap
        Han_: do both vms have the same amount of memory/resources allotted?

        • 2015-08-11 22353, 2015

      • bitmap
        but no, I haven't tried the new one

        • 2015-08-11 22353, 2015

      • Han_
        I think the new one has more memory allocated.

        • 2015-08-11 22342, 2015

      • Han_
        The base memory is 4GB for the new one, and only 2GB for the old one.

        • 2015-08-11 22355, 2015

      • bitmap
        hm, it might just be from initially cold caches on the new one, but I can't say for sure

        • 2015-08-11 22309, 2015

      • bitmap
        recording is a really big table but it shouldn't be that slow

        • 2015-08-11 22353, 2015

      • bitmap
        you can prepend the query with EXPLAIN on both machines to see if it's taking the same route

        • 2015-08-11 22347, 2015

      • Han_
        Thanks for the suggestion, I'll take a look.

        • 2015-08-11 22330, 2015

      • Nyanko-sensei joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22301, 2015

      • dufferzafar
        Gentlecat: You still getting a 500 on CB's homepage (for the events pull)? Because for me it's working fine.

        • 2015-08-11 22312, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        yeah

        • 2015-08-11 22322, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        I'm not sure why that's happening

        • 2015-08-11 22331, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        and why I'm not getting any tracebacks

        • 2015-08-11 22354, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        let me try with a new database later

        • 2015-08-11 22317, 2015

      • dufferzafar
        I'll try setting this pull up on my server and maybe i'll find out what's different on my machine

        • 2015-08-11 22316, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        dufferzafar: same thing on user page after I created a review for an event

        • 2015-08-11 22342, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        dufferzafar: is there any way to see these reviews?

        • 2015-08-11 22302, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        on homepage or at /review/

        • 2015-08-11 22308, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        ok, first problem seems to be fixed

        • 2015-08-11 22334, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        my branch was behind

        • 2015-08-11 22352, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        and I guess the answer to my question is no

        • 2015-08-11 22354, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        this is how event reviews look like on user page: https://i.imgur.com/IDjBEb1.png (first two)

        • 2015-08-11 22302, 2015

      • D4RK-PH0ENiX joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22347, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        Project musicbrainz-server_master build #173: SUCCESS in 18 min: http://ci.musicbrainz.org/job/musicbrainz-server_…

        • 2015-08-11 22348, 2015

      • MBJenkins
        Michael Wiencek: Don't return "result" of _warn_about_invalid_ids

        • 2015-08-11 22318, 2015

      • D4RK-PH0ENiX joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22348, 2015

      • diana_olhovik joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22359, 2015

      • Nyanko-sensei joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22314, 2015

      • LordSputnik joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22346, 2015

      • D4RK-PH0ENiX joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22312, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        alastairp: ping

        • 2015-08-11 22310, 2015

      • alastairp
        Hello

        • 2015-08-11 22310, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        hey, I forgot to apply schema update for AB last week

        • 2015-08-11 22313, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        https://github.com/metabrainz/acousticbrainz-serv…

        • 2015-08-11 22347, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        when I tried to run it yesterday, last ALTER TABLE seems to have some problem

        • 2015-08-11 22353, 2015

      • alastairp
        alter table failed?

        • 2015-08-11 22308, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        it didn't fail

        • 2015-08-11 22327, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        I ran it and there was no response

        • 2015-08-11 22313, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        maybe it was trying to change the table, but it took unusually long time

        • 2015-08-11 22341, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        so I just stopped it after half an hour

        • 2015-08-11 22328, 2015

      • alastairp
        right

        • 2015-08-11 22348, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        any idea what the problem might be?

        • 2015-08-11 22354, 2015

      • alastairp
        I saw one of the failures said that a table was missing, right?

        • 2015-08-11 22305, 2015

      • alastairp
        I guess since it was all in a transaction it rolled the whole thing back

        • 2015-08-11 22312, 2015

      • alastairp
        no, I don’t. did you try just running it again?

        • 2015-08-11 22322, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        yeah, it didn't actually apply anything

        • 2015-08-11 22334, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        no I didn't try again

        • 2015-08-11 22341, 2015

      • alastairp
        I’d go for it again

        • 2015-08-11 22306, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        maybe this is related http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAL9jXCFwKXt… [at mail.gmail.com]

        • 2015-08-11 22321, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        ok, trying again

        • 2015-08-11 22343, 2015

      • alastairp
        hmm, we it’s only on a small table, right?

        • 2015-08-11 22349, 2015

      • alastairp
        so it shouldn’t take a long time

        • 2015-08-11 22315, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        yeah, dataset table should be very small

        • 2015-08-11 22320, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        hm, it worked now

        • 2015-08-11 22325, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        strange

        • 2015-08-11 22321, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        there are a bunch of pull requests btw, if you have time for that

        • 2015-08-11 22310, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        I implemented proper job list for datasets yesterday https://github.com/metabrainz/acousticbrainz-serv…

        • 2015-08-11 22304, 2015

      • Nyanko-sensei joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22308, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        you can reference specific job and it works with browser's history stack, which is nice

        • 2015-08-11 22347, 2015

      • alastairp
        well

        • 2015-08-11 22309, 2015

      • alastairp
        “which is nice” … shouldn’t even have to be said :-P

        • 2015-08-11 22318, 2015

      • alastairp
        yeah, I’m back now. I’ll look at reviews this week

        • 2015-08-11 22309, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        gsoc ends next week, we need to decide what else needs to be done

        • 2015-08-11 22327, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        I won't have much time after 23rd

        • 2015-08-11 22313, 2015

      • alastairp
        :D

        • 2015-08-11 22334, 2015

      • alastairp
        OK, let me get through the current backlog

        • 2015-08-11 22345, 2015

      • alastairp
        in terms of the document, what do you think is missing?

        • 2015-08-11 22342, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        is Milestone #2 done?

        • 2015-08-11 22327, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        there's this mention of "extra copy of the data set"

        • 2015-08-11 22342, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        do we need that?

        • 2015-08-11 22352, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        and then in #3 you mention https://github.com/metabrainz/acousticbrainz-serv…

        • 2015-08-11 22332, 2015

      • alastairp
        hmm. I would say that the process that #88 fixes works, it’s just slow

        • 2015-08-11 22337, 2015

      • alastairp
        so let’s not worry about that for now

        • 2015-08-11 22301, 2015

      • alastairp
        for extra copy of the dataset, I think that was so that someone could continue editing even if it was evaluating

        • 2015-08-11 22326, 2015

      • alastairp
        I think it’s better if we just lock the dataset if it’s in a queue or being evaluated. Can you edit the document and implement that?

        • 2015-08-11 22350, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        sure

        • 2015-08-11 22323, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        but then I don't understand how it would work with extra copies

        • 2015-08-11 22332, 2015

      • alastairp
        no, neither do I

        • 2015-08-11 22337, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        separate is going to be created?

        • 2015-08-11 22342, 2015

      • alastairp
        I guess you’d make a temporary copy, do the evaluation on that

        • 2015-08-11 22348, 2015

      • alastairp
        and then delete it when the model is made

        • 2015-08-11 22355, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        that seems very inconvenient

        • 2015-08-11 22345, 2015

      • alastairp
        so, let’s not do it :(

        • 2015-08-11 22348, 2015

      • alastairp
        * :)

        • 2015-08-11 22343, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        ok

        • 2015-08-11 22301, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        do we still need to lock dataset during evaluation?

        • 2015-08-11 22315, 2015

      • alastairp
        hmm

        • 2015-08-11 22321, 2015

      • alastairp
        actually, I don’t know

        • 2015-08-11 22326, 2015

      • alastairp
        what are the situations:

        • 2015-08-11 22337, 2015

      • alastairp
        1) if it’s in the queue, and you edit, the edited one will be evaluated

        • 2015-08-11 22312, 2015

      • alastairp
        2) if it’s started, the evaluation will be happening on extracted yaml files, and so changes won’t affect it

        • 2015-08-11 22334, 2015

      • alastairp
        do we have implemented something which says you can’t re-submit if it’s in process?

        • 2015-08-11 22335, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        data is copied before evaluation starts, not when it's added into the queue

        • 2015-08-11 22305, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        what do you mean re-submit?

        • 2015-08-11 22311, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        re-submit for evaluation?

        • 2015-08-11 22350, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        you can't create evaluation job for a dataset if there's already one running/in the queue

        • 2015-08-11 22333, 2015

      • alastairp
        right, that’s what I mean

        • 2015-08-11 22359, 2015

      • alastairp
        and if you open a dataset that is in the queue, does it show a message telling you this?

        • 2015-08-11 22322, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        no

        • 2015-08-11 22306, 2015

      • alastairp
        let’s do that, and then leave it

        • 2015-08-11 22326, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        evaluator just picks current version of the dataset

        • 2015-08-11 22332, 2015

      • alastairp
        fine

        • 2015-08-11 22341, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        there are no snapshots or anything like that

        • 2015-08-11 22348, 2015

      • alastairp
        “this dataset is in the queue, if you edit it, the updated version will be used"

        • 2015-08-11 22312, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        "...if you edit it before evaluation starts..."

        • 2015-08-11 22320, 2015

      • alastairp
        “this dataset is being evaluated. you can edit it, but the changes won’t take effect (and you won’t be able to submit it) until the current evaluation has finished"

        • 2015-08-11 22343, 2015

      • alastairp
        yeah, the thing I don’t like here is that there’s a possible small race condition

        • 2015-08-11 22354, 2015

      • alastairp
        not quite a race condition, but if you think it hasn’t started

        • 2015-08-11 22356, 2015

      • alastairp
        and you make a change

        • 2015-08-11 22306, 2015

      • alastairp
        but it starts before you save

        • 2015-08-11 22312, 2015

      • alastairp
        though, I’m not too worried about that. I’d rather make some tickets for future work and move on to #3 or #4

        • 2015-08-11 22320, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        I'm probably not going to have enough time to implement #3 and #4

        • 2015-08-11 22342, 2015

      • alastairp
        yeah - just 1 is fine

        • 2015-08-11 22357, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        *or

        • 2015-08-11 22304, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        maybe .history file generation

        • 2015-08-11 22305, 2015

      • alastairp
        #3 would give us complete end-to-end dataset, model generation and evaluation

        • 2015-08-11 22317, 2015

      • alastairp
        hmm

        • 2015-08-11 22325, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        and I still have a couple of bugs to fix

        • 2015-08-11 22326, 2015

      • alastairp
        you don’t think you have enough time even to do one?

        • 2015-08-11 22349, 2015

      • alastairp
        (one sec, I’m just heading to the office. I’ll be back in 20)

        • 2015-08-11 22339, 2015

      • reosarevok joined the channel

        • 2015-08-11 22346, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        in #3 it's still unclear after we have the model

        • 2015-08-11 22318, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        everything after and including "To evaluate at a larger scale..."

        • 2015-08-11 22322, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        and I need to fix AB-64, AB-63, and AB-61

        • 2015-08-11 22305, 2015

      • alastairp
        right

        • 2015-08-11 22321, 2015

      • alastairp
        you have a custom evaluation script, right?

        • 2015-08-11 22335, 2015

      • alastairp
        do you do this step https://github.com/MTG/gaia/blob/master/src/bindi… ?

        • 2015-08-11 22311, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        no, just get parameters and generate confusion

        • 2015-08-11 22313, 2015

      • Gentlecat
        matrix

        • 2015-08-11 22332, 2015

      • alastairp
        right

        • 2015-08-11 22319, 2015

      • alastairp
        sorry - someone called me away to talk :(

        • 2015-08-11 22325, 2015

      • alastairp
        my thoughts are that after this step, someone looks at their "83% accuracy" an says "cool, I want to use this model to actually generate high-level data"