search for: 24004

...s_parent] 23999 ? S 2:45 samba: task[dcesrv] 24000 ? S 0:00 samba: tfork waiter process 24001 ? S 0:03 samba: task[nbtd] 24002 ? Ss 0:01 /usr/sbin/smbd -D --option=server role check:inhibit=yes --foreground 24003 ? S 0:00 samba: task[wrepl] 24004 ? S 0:01 samba: task[ldapsrv] 24005 ? S 0:02 samba: task[cldapd] 24006 ? S 0:08 samba: conn[kdc_tcp] c[ipv4:192.168.0.88:40340] s[ipv4:192.168.0.6:88] server_id[24006.42] 24007 ? S 5:47 samba: task[dreplsrv] 24008 ? S 0:00 samba: task[winb...

...0.00 B? 0.00 %? 0.00 % [z_rd_int] ? ??screen,14590 ? ??? ??bash,14591 ? ??????? ??rsync,32497 -av --inplace fnask::backupall_S2V2_xen-sr-rpkn01-nfs/ . ? ??????????? ??rsync,32498 -av --inplace fnask::backupall_S2V2_xen-sr-rpkn01-nfs/ . ? ??screen,32261 ? ??? ??bash,32262 ? ??????? ??rsync,24004 -av --inplace freenas-bnkw::backupall_zfspool_sas_seagate/sr_rpkn02/ . ? ??????????? ??rsync,24005 -av --inplace freenas-bnkw::backupall_zfspool_sas_seagate/sr_rpkn02/ .

I have been working for a few days on a new (Windows) system, and suddenly WEBrick won''t start. Full error text is at bottom of message. It began after I followed Brian Hogan''s (terrific!) instructions for setting up Eclipse w/Rails in Windows (http://www.napcs.com/howto/railsonwindows.html). The server started fine from w/in Eclipse when I reached that part of the instructions,

...38.083 > 2 fn_slot03_byperson 32.396 > 3 fn_slot03_byperson 41.246 > 4 fn_slot03_byperson 92.904 > 5 fn_slot03_byperson 130.512 > 6 fn_slot03_byperson 113.853 > > tmp <- data2[data2$dbfunc=='fn_slot03_byperson',] >> length(tmp$runtime) > [1] 24004 >> ave(tmp$runtime)[1] > [1] 41.8108 I would have guessed you would get an error, but maybe if ave() is given no grouping factor it just returns a grand mean. Try instead one of these: aggregate(data2, data2$function. , FUN=mean) tapply(data2$runtime, data2$function. , FUN=mean) d...

...0 samba: root process 23998 ? S 0:00 samba: task[s3fs_parent] 23999 ? S 2:45 samba: task[dcesrv] 24000 ? S 0:00 samba: tfork waiter process 24001 ? S 0:03 samba: task[nbtd] 24002 ? Ss 0:01 /usr/sbin/smbd -D --option=server role check:inhibit=yes --foreground 24003 ? S 0:00 samba: task[wrepl] 24004 ? S 0:01 samba: task[ldapsrv] 24005 ? S 0:02 samba: task[cldapd] 24006 ? S 0:08 samba: conn[kdc_tcp] c[ipv4:192.168.0.88:40340] s[ipv4:192.168.0.6:88] server_id[24006.42] 24007 ? S 5:47 samba: task[dreplsrv] 24008 ? S 0:00 samba: task[winbindd_parent] 24009 ? S 0:00 samba: tfork waiter process...

...s_parent] 23999 ?        S      2:45 samba: task[dcesrv] 24000 ?        S      0:00 samba: tfork waiter process 24001 ?        S      0:03 samba: task[nbtd] 24002 ?        Ss     0:01 /usr/sbin/smbd -D --option=server role check:inhibit=yes --foreground 24003 ?        S      0:00 samba: task[wrepl] 24004 ?        S      0:01 samba: task[ldapsrv] 24005 ?        S      0:02 samba: task[cldapd] 24006 ?        S      0:08 samba: conn[kdc_tcp] c[ipv4:192.168.0.88:40340] s[ipv4:192.168.0.6:88] server_id[24006.42] 24007 ?        S      5:47 samba: task[dreplsrv] 24008 ?        S      0:00 samba: task[winb...

On Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:46:03 +0200 (CEST) Gaetan SLONGO <gslongo at it-optics.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Here is the current process list. We can see missing winbind and *mbd > processes : > > > > [root at dmzrodc ~]# netstat -plaunt | egrep "ntp|bind|named|samba|?mbd" I wouldn't worry about 'winbind' not being in the output of the above

...0 samba: root process 23998 ? S 0:00 samba: task[s3fs_parent] 23999 ? S 2:45 samba: task[dcesrv] 24000 ? S 0:00 samba: tfork waiter process 24001 ? S 0:03 samba: task[nbtd] 24002 ? Ss 0:01 /usr/sbin/smbd -D --option=server role check:inhibit=yes --foreground 24003 ? S 0:00 samba: task[wrepl] 24004 ? S 0:01 samba: task[ldapsrv] 24005 ? S 0:02 samba: task[cldapd] 24006 ? S 0:08 samba: conn[kdc_tcp] c[ipv4:192.168.0.88:40340] s[ipv4:192.168.0.6:88] server_id[24006.42] 24007 ? S 5:47 samba: task[dreplsrv] 24008 ? S 0:00 samba: task[winbindd_parent] 24009 ? S 0:00 samba: tfork waiter process...

Hi Stepan, Sorry for the delay. It's great that you are working on MergeFunctions as well and I agree, we should definitely try to combine our efforts to improve MergeFunctions. Just to give you some context, the pass (with the similar function merging patch) is already being used in a production setting. From my point of view, it would be better if we focus on improving its capability

...28291 0 0.01 28291 LzxDecoder.ll 30 276485 0 0.03 276451 * * * machine.ll 15 88030 0 0.02 88000 0 0.01 88000 macroblock.ll 48 986275 0 0.09 986254 0 0.09 986254 MainAr.ll 2 33051 0 0.01 33015 0 0.01 33015 main.ll 1 30703 0 0.01 30678 0 0.01 30678 Main.ll 48 507074 2 0.05 503696 * * * makebins.ll 1 24004 0 0.01 23971 0 0.01 23971 makedent.ll 22 116629 0 0.02 116598 0 0.02 116246 make_dparser.ll 2 27868 0 0.01 27855 0 0.01 27855 make_graph.ll 14 58363 0 0.01 58343 0 0.01 57443 makegraph.ll 6 19891 0 0.01 19872 0 0.01 19872 makelink.ll 3 20866 0 0.01 20833 0 0.01 19918 makesite.ll 2 56296 0 0.01 5626...