I’ve got a question about how reitti calculates significant places/visits.

I was thinking of adjust gps logger so that it doesn’t log points if they’re within 10m of the last point it logged. That will clear up the data when I’m at home or work, so that there is less of a random squiggle of location data. It will record me arriving at home, and leaving home, but not much in between.

Will that impact how reitti calculates locations though? Is it looking at the number of points, or is it simply a matter of duration within a particular vicinity?

Having all of this data stored in a location I can control has been really good.

But yesterday, it was pointed out to me that the API reitti provides means I have access to over a decades worth of location history that I can use to geotag my photo collection! That is a game changer. I’ve been trying to find a way to pull that information from google location history for a long time, and it turns out, you’ve created it!

This is really valuable to me, so I want you to know just how much I appreciate the effort you’ve put in to making it. Thank you

I’m on android. I’ll raise a bug report.

Well, the last update seems to have cleared the queue, and all of my history from that 10 year import now shows, with trips and places identified!

But now, it’s having issues with importing the new google format import. I’ve got a 34MB file there that goes back to 2017, and this data says that it has imported, but then never appears in my history.

If it’s relevant, there is overlap in the data, as my 10 year takeout import went up to 2023, and my “new format” import starts in 2017 and went a couple of days ago. I changed my google account in 2017, but logged in to both on my phone simultaneously, so I was accruing location data on both accounts at the same time for a while before I turned it off on my old account.

Who?

That’s really interesting. Australian here, and I’ve remarked several times how the userbase of the fediverse isn’t dominated by American voices like most other social media platforms I’ve used.

Since I last commented, the queue has jumped from about 9000 outstanding items, to 15,000 outstanding items, and it appears that I have timelines for a large amount of my history now.

However, the estimated time is still slowly creeping up (though only by a minute or two, despite adding 6000 more items to the queue).

I haven’t uploaded anything manually that might have triggered the change in queue size.

Is there any external calls made during processing this queue that might be adding latency?

tl;dr - something is definitely happening

Ok, so it may not be frozen. The numbers in the queue seem to imply it is, however, timelines and places are slowly filling out in my history. A couple of dates I had looked at previously were showing me tracklogs for the day, but not timeline information, and now, they’re showing timelines for the day

I was also trying to set up GPSLogger whilst it was crunching through the backlog, and I manually transferred a file from that app before I had autologging configured. Not sure if that could have done it?

The times don’t overlap, as the takeout file is only up until 2023

i7-8700 with 64GB of RAM

It’s a 1gig json file that has about 10 years of data. I get multiple repeats of the rabbit timeout in the logs. The Job Status section tells me that it’s got just under 9 hours of processing remaining for just over 16,000 in the stay-detection-queue. The numbers change slightly, so something is happening, but it’s been going for over 12 hours now, and the time remaining is slowly going up, not down.

reitti-1  | 2025-07-04T03:06:17.848Z  WARN 1 --- [ntContainer#2-1] o.s.a.r.l.SimpleMessageListenerContainer : Consumer raised exception, processing can restart if the connection factory supports it
reitti-1  |
reitti-1  | com.rabbitmq.client.ShutdownSignalException: channel error; protocol method: #method<channel.close>(reply-code=406, reply-text=PRECONDITION_FAILED - delivery acknowledgement on channel 9 timed out. Timeout value used: 1800000 ms. This timeout value can be configured, see consumers doc guide to learn more, class-id=0, method-id=0)
reitti-1  |     at org.springframework.amqp.rabbit.listener.BlockingQueueConsumer.checkShutdown(BlockingQueueConsumer.java:493) ~[spring-rabbit-3.2.5.jar!/:3.2.5]
reitti-1  |     at org.springframework.amqp.rabbit.listener.BlockingQueueConsumer.nextMessage(BlockingQueueConsumer.java:554) ~[spring-rabbit-3.2.5.jar!/:3.2.5]
reitti-1  |     at org.springframework.amqp.rabbit.listener.SimpleMessageListenerContainer.doReceiveAndExecute(SimpleMessageListenerContainer.java:1046) ~[spring-rabbit-3.2.5.jar!/:3.2.5]
reitti-1  |     at org.springframework.amqp.rabbit.listener.SimpleMessageListenerContainer.receiveAndExecute(SimpleMessageListenerContainer.java:1021) ~[spring-rabbit-3.2.5.jar!/:3.2.5]
reitti-1  |     at org.springframework.amqp.rabbit.listener.SimpleMessageListenerContainer$AsyncMessageProcessingConsumer.mainLoop(SimpleMessageListenerContainer.java:1423) ~[spring-rabbit-3.2.5.jar!/:3.2.5]
reitti-1  |     at org.springframework.amqp.rabbit.listener.SimpleMessageListenerContainer$AsyncMessageProcessingConsumer.run(SimpleMessageListenerContainer.java:1324) ~[spring-rabbit-3.2.5.jar!/:3.2.5]
reitti-1  |     at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) ~[na:na]
reitti-1  | Caused by: com.rabbitmq.client.ShutdownSignalException: channel error; protocol method: #method<channel.close>(reply-code=406, reply-text=PRECONDITION_FAILED - delivery acknowledgement on channel 9 timed out. Timeout value used: 1800000 ms. This timeout value can be configured, see consumers doc guide to learn more, class-id=0, method-id=0)
reitti-1  |     at com.rabbitmq.client.impl.ChannelN.asyncShutdown(ChannelN.java:528) ~[amqp-client-5.25.0.jar!/:5.25.0]
reitti-1  |     at com.rabbitmq.client.impl.ChannelN.processAsync(ChannelN.java:349) ~[amqp-client-5.25.0.jar!/:5.25.0]
reitti-1  |     at com.rabbitmq.client.impl.AMQChannel.handleCompleteInboundCommand(AMQChannel.java:193) ~[amqp-client-5.25.0.jar!/:5.25.0]
reitti-1  |     at com.rabbitmq.client.impl.AMQChannel.handleFrame(AMQChannel.java:125) ~[amqp-client-5.25.0.jar!/:5.25.0]
reitti-1  |     at com.rabbitmq.client.impl.AMQConnection.readFrame(AMQConnection.java:761) ~[amqp-client-5.25.0.jar!/:5.25.0]
reitti-1  |     at com.rabbitmq.client.impl.AMQConnection.access$400(AMQConnection.java:48) ~[amqp-client-5.25.0.jar!/:5.25.0]
reitti-1  |     at com.rabbitmq.client.impl.AMQConnection$MainLoop.run(AMQConnection.java:688) ~[amqp-client-5.25.0.jar!/:5.25.0]
reitti-1  |     ... 1 common frames omitted

I managed to break our instance. I imported several years worth of google takeout location data, and now the “stay-detection-queue” is stalled.

Minorities are outnumbered by definition. Putting minority rights up to majority vote leads to minorities getting fucked over…

If this actually stands a chance of taking off, I’ll honestly take what I can get to normalise HDR images

HDR capable PNGs that don’t look shite on SDR displays? Sign me up!

Empathy

I don’t use bluesky or nostr for the very reasons I outlined in my comment, and I wouldn’t recommend them to anyone. Especially nostr, which is a shit hole.

My point is though, they both do non centralised ID, giving similar benefits to what the OP is suggesting, without the centralisation they’re suggesting

I’m not the OP.

And no, a central account doesn’t require a central service, it just requires amendments to the protocols to allow for a decentralised identity. Nostr, bluesky, etc all work that way. Nostr is full of nazis and bitcoin bros, and bluesky is effectively centralised in other ways, but both of them do have a genuinely decentralised single identity system.

There are a few ways of doing it. A single account on the first platform, and then signing up to remote platforms with that account. A system of trust that allows a user to verify that other remote accounts are genuinely also them. Combine it with platforms that recognise content posted from other accounts/platforms that belong to the same person, and let them edit the “remote” content locally and federate it out again etc.

So you don’t end up with a centralised identity, but rather, the ability to manage your identity from whichever instance you happen to be signed in to as if it were created locally on that instance.

A passport in the way described here doesn’t need to be centralised. Your profile could link to your other profiles through metadata, rather than a centralised system.

Strange, she can’t fall from a branch either. Whenever she does, she always seems to catch herself with spider web…