Fork me on GitHub
#datomic
<
2017-01-27
>
stuartsierra14:01:02

@bballantine and in Datomic datalog query isn't precisely the same thing as clojure.core/and. As I read it, [?p1] would bind ?p1 to the entity position in a datom.

tengstrand16:01:12

@favila Thanks, now both works! It was hard to figure out when reading the documentation. Still waiting for that book that Stu is going to write 😉

apsey17:01:57

Hi, regarding s3 log rotation, what does cognitect mean with time-status-reached on:

* Better naming convention for logrotation:
  `{bucket}/{system-root}/{status}/{time-status-reached}`,
  where status is "active" or "standby".

potetm17:01:16

Does anyone happen to know how to interpret the GarbageSegments CloudWatch metric? I assumed it would be an accumulation of unreferenced segments over time, but it appears to go up and down.

potetm17:01:58

I'm guessing it's the garbage a particular indexing job creates?

bmays17:01:06

Anyone else seeing lein deps failing on org/javassist/javassist/3.18.1-GA/javassist-3.18.1-GA.jar?? I believe it’s a dependency of com.datomic/datomic-pro “0.9.5372"

bmays17:01:45

it’s not just me losing my mind.

potetm17:01:47

It literally just started.

potetm17:01:44

Obviously not a datomic thing. There's a checksum mismatch.

potetm17:01:50

For us anyways.

bmays17:01:31

Retrieving com/datomic/datomic-pro/0.9.5372/datomic-pro-0.9.5372.jar from 
Could not transfer artifact org.javassist:javassist:jar:3.18.1-GA from/to central (): Checksum validation failed, expected d9a09f7732226af26bf99f19e2cffe0ae219db5b but is 1153878fa3db0c164318521e8e77106f9099f4e5

bmays17:01:41

I noticed it resolves for my transit dependency though

bmays17:01:08

I’m fairly new to all this so feel free to redirect if this isn’t the appropriate channel. this is quite strange though, a routine build began to fail and now it’s affecting all developers

potetm18:01:21

I don't know where the proper place to ask would be 🙂

potetm18:01:26

The maven authorities?

potetm18:01:36

I'm getting this:

Could not transfer artifact org.javassist:javassist:jar:3.18.1-GA from/to central (): Checksum validation failed, expected d9a09f7732226af26bf99f19e2cffe0ae219db5b but is 1153878fa3db0c164318521e8e77106f9099f4e5

bmays18:01:15

Adding this exclusion fixed the deps but possibly broke ring:

[ring-middleware-format "0.7.0"
                  :exclusions [org.clojure/test.check com.cognitect/transit-clj]]

akjetma18:01:21

❤️ awesome

akjetma20:01:09

^ checksum passes now

jdkealy21:01:25

is it normal for a query like this to take up to 10 mins with datomic ? 2 organizations, 10k collections, 2.5 million "content" https://gist.github.com/jdkealy/b9d62366c46ba078051bad849e82c200

stuartsierra21:01:58

@jdkealy You can learn a bit about the behavior of a query by executing each :where clause separately.

stuartsierra21:01:15

In your example, start with [:find ?collection :in $ ?org :where [?collection :collection/organization ?org]], then add the next clause, and so on.

stuartsierra21:01:09

You can also think about how indexes will be used to resolve each clause in the query. Since you start with a binding for ?org, it's a single lookup in VAET to get ?collection, then another VAET lookup for ?content, finally a separate EAVT lookup for each ?content to get ?fk, then an iteration to find the max.

laujensen21:01:10

Evening gents. Is there a way to start a datomic transactor from within clojure?

stuartsierra21:01:44

@jdkealy Most of those lookups will probably be handled from the Peer's local cache, after warmup. But if ?content entities are large or randomly distributed there might be a lot of EAVT segments to fetch to answer that query.

jdkealy22:01:18

got it thanks @stuartsierra i realized i didn't have an index on content/collection... that appears to be making it extra slow

jdkealy22:01:13

hmm now that i have indexes my query runs out of java heap space

jdkealy22:01:49

if i were to jack up memory locally... would i do so on the transactor or when starting my server

pesterhazy22:01:00

not on the transactor, on the peer

jdkealy22:01:14

this creates a peer right? "(d/db (d/connect uri))" ?