search for: 37k

...pdf is a call graph generated by kcachegrind. I still don't understand all the numbers (and this PDF seems not to include commas where it should), but if you look at the left fork, the bottom two ovals, "Schedule..." is called 16K times and "setHeightToAtLeas..." is called 37K times. On the right fork, RAGreed... is called 35K times. Those are far too many calls to *anything* for a simple sequence of "call" LLVM instructions. Something seems horribly wrong. - Paul

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Helmut Hullen <Hullen at t-online.de> wrote: > Hallo, ToddAndMargo, > > Du meintest am 15.05.16: > >> Is there anything in Samba that will help protect >> against ransomware? > > The linux principle is "one job - one tool". Antivirus software exists. > It doesn't help against really new malware, it doesn't

...3 at http://cran.r-project.org/bin/linux/ubuntu/precise/ have names for the r-base package that seem erroneous r-base_2.15.3-1precise0precise1.diff.gz 02-Mar-2013 14:09 79K r-base_2.15.3-1precise0precise1.dsc 02-Mar-2013 14:09 2.4K r-base_2.15.3-1precise0precise1_all.deb 02-Mar-2013 17:49 37K Should this be r-base_2.15.3-1precise1.diff.gz r-base_2.15.3-1precise1.dsc r-base_2.15.3-1precise1_all.deb and, if yes, can this be fixed? Many thanks in advance! Best wishes, Tobias

We run our IMAP spool on ZFS that''s derived from LUNs on a Netapp filer. There''s a great deal of churn in e-mail folders, with messages appearing and being deleted frequently. I know that ZFS uses copy-on- write, so that blocks in use are never overwritten, and that deleted blocks are added to a free list. This behavior would spread the free list all over the zpool. As well,

...440B 0 > 0 1 50 49 0 0| 510k 0 | 35B 35B: 604k 1775k:1066B 0 > 0 2 50 49 0 0| 526k 2212k| 0 0 : 575k 25k: 412B 0 > 0 1 50 49 0 0| 534k 458k| 0 35B: 663k 2804k:1739B 0 > 0 1 50 49 0 0| 538k 0 | 35B 0 : 574k 37k: 591B 0 > 0 11 37 51 0 0| 496k 24M| 121k 128k: 864k 6799k:8131B 4978B> 0 2 53 44 1 0| 494k 0 | 162k 196k:1481k 19M: 806B 0 > 1 19 58 22 1 0| 408k 9754k| 178k 243k: 597k 5339k: 35M 223k> 1 17 31 50 1 0| 506k 862k| 132B 158B: 914k 5...

...pdf is a call graph generated by kcachegrind. I still don't understand all the numbers (and this PDF seems not to include commas where it should), but if you look at the left fork, the bottom two ovals, "Schedule..." is called 16K times and "setHeightToAtLeas..." is called 37K times. On the right fork, RAGreed... is called 35K times. Those are far too many calls to *anything* for a simple sequence of "call" LLVM instructions. Something seems horribly wrong. - Paul _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list LLVMdev at cs.u...

...8 214 1 0 98 1 0 0| 140k 499k|9.70| 14 8 26 5 69 0 0 0| 0 1260k|1.30| 0 46 56 7 38 0 0 0| 0 204k|0.30| 0 12 14 11 75 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 22 10 68 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 16 10 71 3 0 0| 192k 37k|14.0| 12 2 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 152k| 0| 0 2 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 1 1 98 1 0 0| 16k 2569k|14.8| 1 207 1 1 98 0 0 0|4096B 0 |1.10| 1 0 1 0 99 0 0 0...

Hello dear list, I've recently discovered 'doveadm stats' and I'm trying to use "doveadm stats dump user" and "doveadm stats dump session" to understand the pop/imap users that put more stress on the hard disks. My problem is that some users refuse to delete their emails from the server, so they keep 20GB of maildir files on the server, the webmail (roundcube)

...searches takes forever > > and meanwhile all the users wait. > > (already tried roundcube + memcache(d) but didn't help) > > What is forever in your context? > I'm using roundcube and a folder with about 78k mails opens in < 1 sec > unsorted. A folder with about 37k messages from a mailinglist and thread > sort takes < 3 sec. My roundcube shows 200 messages per page by default. > On a side note, are you using an imap proxy for roundcube? It doesn't > help you with your dovecot problem but it speeds up roundcube. > > To speed up imap se...

...- 18K - rpool/ROOT/opensolaris 2.23G 18.7G 2.22G legacy rpool/ROOT/opensolaris@install 1.15M - 2.22G - rpool/ROOT/opensolaris/opt 3.60M 18.7G 3.60M /a/opt rpool/ROOT/opensolaris/opt@install 0 - 3.60M - rpool/export 37K 18.7G 19K /a/export rpool/export@install 0 - 19K - rpool/export/home 18K 18.7G 18K /a/export/home rpool/export/home@install 0 - 18K - I can mount rpool/ROOT/opensolaris manually (as read-only): # mount -F zfs rpool/RO...

....70| 14 8 >> 26 5 69 0 0 0| 0 1260k|1.30| 0 46 >> 56 7 38 0 0 0| 0 204k|0.30| 0 12 >> 14 11 75 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 >> 22 10 68 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 >> 16 10 71 3 0 0| 192k 37k|14.0| 12 2 >> 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 >> 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 152k| 0| 0 2 >> 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 >> 1 1 98 1 0 0| 16k 2569k|14.8| 1 207 >> 1 1 98 0 0 0|4096B...

I sincerely apologize if this has been covered before on the forums. I tried searching my mailbox of over 37K messages from this group, but my search functionality is broken at present. I''m trying to understand if XCP has any limitations with regards to storage networks based on Fiber Channel. Specifically, do I need a cluster technology with XCP to enable shared LVM access across nodes against a...

...ss,miss%,dhit,dh%,dmis,dm%,phit,ph%,pmis,pm%,mhit,mh%,mmis,mm%,mfug,mrug, 1G, 31M, 31M, 99,111K, 0, 28M, 99, 99K, 0, 2M, 99, 12K, 0, 1M, 98, 13K, 1, 43, 43, 1G,147K,145K, 99, 1K, 0, 14K, 99, 2, 0,131K, 99, 1K, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1G,166K,166K, 100, 0, 0, 37K,100, 0, 0,128K,100, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1G, 42K, 42K, 100, 0, 0, 42K,100, 0, 0, 256,100, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1G, 42K, 42K, 100, 0, 0, 42K,100, 0, 0, 256,100, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1G, 42K, 42K, 100, 0, 0, 41K,100, 0,...

...open the inbox, > the imap searches takes forever > and meanwhile all the users wait. > (already tried roundcube + memcache(d) but didn't help) What is forever in your context? I'm using roundcube and a folder with about 78k mails opens in < 1 sec unsorted. A folder with about 37k messages from a mailinglist and thread sort takes < 3 sec. My roundcube shows 200 messages per page by default. On a side note, are you using an imap proxy for roundcube? It doesn't help you with your dovecot problem but it speeds up roundcube. To speed up imap searches i can recommend to...

...0 0| 140k 499k|9.70| 14 8 > 26 5 69 0 0 0| 0 1260k|1.30| 0 46 > 56 7 38 0 0 0| 0 204k|0.30| 0 12 > 14 11 75 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 > 22 10 68 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 > 16 10 71 3 0 0| 192k 37k|14.0| 12 2 > 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 > 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 152k| 0| 0 2 > 0 0 100 0 0 0| 0 0 | 0| 0 0 > 1 1 98 1 0 0| 16k 2569k|14.8| 1 207 > 1 1 98 0 0 0|4096B 0 |1.10| 1...

...>> > and meanwhile all the users wait. >> > (already tried roundcube + memcache(d) but didn't help) >> >> What is forever in your context? >> I'm using roundcube and a folder with about 78k mails opens in < 1 sec >> unsorted. A folder with about 37k messages from a mailinglist and >> thread >> sort takes < 3 sec. My roundcube shows 200 messages per page by >> default. >> On a side note, are you using an imap proxy for roundcube? It doesn't >> help you with your dovecot problem but it speeds up roundcube....

...> is a call graph generated by kcachegrind. I still don't understand all the numbers (and this PDF seems not to include commas where it should), but if you look at the left fork, the bottom two ovals, "Schedule..." is called 16K times and "setHeightToAtLeas..." is called 37K times. On the right fork, RAGreed... is called 35K times. > > Those are far too many calls to *anything* for a simple sequence of "call" LLVM instructions. Something seems horribly wrong. > > - Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM...

Hi Paul, I think you may have gone beyond what I understand in how the legacy JIT code works. It looks like the call to addGlobalMapping should short-circuit the named function look up that I described, but I can't account for why it behaves differently on Mac vs. Linux. I still don't understand how the external pointers persist between writing and reading, but it sounds like you have

...ot;", 975) = 0 [pid 27922] close(16) = 0 [pid 27922] open("/var/data/vmail/private/pdf/xapian.db/postlist.baseB", O_RDONLY|O_LARGEFILE) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) [pid 27922] pread64(13, "\0\0\0\4\1\26\30\26\30\1O\37\371\34?\27\343\37\241\37k\34\267\34W\34\25\33\254\33\202\33"..., 8192, 516096) = 8192 [pid 27922] pread64(13, "\0\0\0\4\0\1\\\10\252\0A\37\371\37\347\37\321\37\264\37\216\37\7\36\367\36\330\36\311\36\262\4"..., 8192, 507904) = 8192 [pid 27922] pread64(13, "\0\0\0\4\0\4\230\0051\0017\37\343\37\303\37\256\...

Hi All, I've been fiddling around with various ways to estimate the popularity of R, SAS, SPSS, Stata, JMP, Minitab, Statistica, Systat, BMDP, S-PLUS, R-PLUS and Revolution R. It's not an easy task. You can see what I've come up with so far at http://r4stats.com/popularity . I'm sure people will have plenty of ideas on how to improve this, so please let me know what you think.