[03:09] I just realized that I am starving [03:10] :( [03:10] I thnk I ate breakfast before starting on this thing... [03:10] 14 hours ago :( [03:14] the empty cheese packet on the counter tells me that I might have nibbled at some point [03:14] back later [03:15] doesn't seem like the tracker will blow up again [10:35] what concurrency setting makes sense for this? taking into account rate limiting and things [11:11] just 1 [11:12] the tracker won't issue a second job to you (as categorized by ipaddress) unless we add a second shortener [11:12] yeah, had a short run with higher concurrency and got an error from the tracker [11:15] the idea is that one instance should be able to work as fast as possible without getting banned [11:15] although I don't think we're achieving that; it's not particularly fast [11:20] from what I remember some time ago, mostly it was waiting because of rate limiting and so on. that's why I had it set up on my rpi then, no big cpu usage, low power, mostly just waiting [11:21] yes, I've got it set to 20 requests per second for this one [11:21] hmmm [11:21] so we need more ip's? [11:21] but mine don't manage more than 15 or 16 per second [11:21] and more shorteners [11:21] Smiley: yes :) [11:23] well i'd say get it in teh warrior asap [11:23] that'll give us some ips at least [11:23] as for more shortners hmmm [11:31] it is in the warrior :) [11:32] k cool [11:44] "WARNING: ServiceException(HTTP exception: '') on code 378dg" [12:01] hmm [12:02] I get an ordinary 404 on that one [12:03] perhaps a transient error? [12:05] yeah, only saw it once for that code [12:42] any idea on "WARNING: Server refused data for task c9f14cb6-04ac-11e4-8df6-040104b9e501" ? [12:42] Getting it from time to time, but only on 1 out of 3 servers I'm running the script on [15:36] hmm [15:37] deathy: it doesn't record a lot of data about that sort of thing, but c9f14cb6-04ac-11e4-8df6-040104b9e501 is marked as finished, and was completed by 'bhtooefr' [20:10] no idea when it marked as finished? [20:10] could either have been an error in my upload presumably.. [20:11] or else it was assigned both to bhtooefr and myself..which is strange (maybe not in case the other one was assigned earlier but timed out or something and re-assigned to me..) [23:58] db48x: here's a recent one: http://pastebin.com/CvVzYDd1