search for: 184mb

...FLAC file even though the WAV file size is identical for all 5 WAV files. Only the volume is different. When you renormalize the WAV to its original volume the file is still 100% original. My tests are the following. source file WAV. 1 hour 440HTZ tone. 600MB. volume at 100. FLAC file size is 184MB. volume at 75. FLAC file size is 166MB. volume at 50. FLAC file size is 143MB. volume at 25. FLAC file size is 109MB. volume at 5. FLAC file size is 96MB. From184MB to 96MB. As you can see from the full 100 normalize volume to the 5 normalize volume it is half the file size. So to put i...

Hi the list. I do not understand the philosophy behind numeric and integer. - 1 is numeric (which I find surprising) - 2 is numeric. - 1:2 is integer. Why is that ? Christophe

...e), the call will complete. Extensions are configured exactly the same using the AMP portion of Astersk@Home. I've google'ed quite a bit but can't seem to find a solution or pointer on this one. The only thing I can come up with is that my system is a little shy on memory. I have 184MB in there, and it gets to about 93% used, although the server still isn't hitting swap. Suggestions or points are greatly appreciated! Pat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/2005032...

...age is raid0 with 12 SAS disks. A LUN is created over all disks, make as EXT4 file system, and used as glusterfs brick. On the samba server, use dd test local ext4 and glusterfs, write bandwidth are 477MB/s and 357MB/s, details as follow. When mount cifs on Centos 6.0, write bandwidth downgrade to 184MB/s and 117MB/s, very different. Using 4 win7 clients to test with SANergy/Iometer, cifs over ext4 aggregate throughput can get about 391 MB/s. However, cifs over glusterfs aggregate throughput only can get about 180 MB/s. Why CIFS performance is so slow over glusterfs backend? Anybody meet such is...

...age is raid0 with 12 SAS disks. A LUN is created over all disks, make as EXT4 file system, and used as glusterfs brick. On the samba server, use dd test local ext4 and glusterfs, write bandwidth are 477MB/s and 357MB/s, details as follow. When mount cifs on Centos 6.0, write bandwidth downgrade to 184MB/s and 117MB/s, very different. Using 4 win7 clients to test with SANergy/Iometer, cifs over ext4 aggregate throughput can get about 391 MB/s. However, cifs over glusterfs aggregate throughput only can get about 180 MB/s. Why CIFS performance is so slow over glusterfs backend? Anybody meet such is...

We have a site that is running Mongrel and is down. Below is the Mongrel log file information. The server is a Linux server with 2gb of RAM. EV1 (hosting site) says that since this is a Linux server that the RAM is cached and that there is plenty of free memory available. Can anyone make sense of this error and have some suggestion of options that I may take to correct this issue and get