search for: 62052

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "62052".

Did you mean: 2052
2007 May 16
2
Hit mongrel once...all is well, hit it again...stack level too deep?
Hi there. I''ve dropped a mongrel log item here: http://pastie.caboo.se/62052 I can hit my app fine, once. Hitting it again gives me a 500 error and this log entry. I think it''s application code causing the problem as I have a second app running that doesn''t have this behavior, but I''m unsure how to proceed finding root cause here. Suggesti...
2013 Apr 13
1
Dynamic dns updates fail for (most) xp, vista and win7 clients
...ONE': update failed: rejected by secure update (REFUSED) Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: cancelling transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: starting transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: client 192.168.12.205#62052: update 'example.lan/IN' denied Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: cancelling transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: starting transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: disallowing update of signer=ne...
2013 Apr 27
1
Dynamic dns updat­es fail for (most) xp, vi­sta and win7 clients
...': update failed: rejected by secure update (REFUSED) Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: cancelling transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: starting transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: client 192.168.12.205#62052: update 'example.lan/IN' denied Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: cancelling transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: starting transaction on zone example.lan Apr 13 00:20:50 server named[30147]: samba_dlz: disallowing update of signer...
2014 Jan 28
3
[LLVMdev] MergeFunctions: reduce complexity to O(log(N))
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
2014 Jan 30
3
[LLVMdev] MergeFunctions: reduce complexity to O(log(N))
...ngeConstraint.ll 133 484479 16 0.05 482601 12 0.04 478383 btKinematicCharacterController.ll 106 264783 6 0.03 260949 1 0.03 263763 btManifoldResult.ll 40 93288 1 0.02 91856 1 0.02 92020 btMinkowskiPenetrationDepthSolver.ll 51 155516 4 0.02 154982 2 0.02 154941 btMinkowskiSumShape.ll 35 63484 1 0.02 62052 1 0.01 62039 btMultimaterialTriangleMeshShape.ll 1 7145 0 0.01 7127 0 0.01 7127 btMultiSapBroadphase.ll 128 287185 33 0.03 277357 * * * btMultiSphereShape.ll 63 118210 8 0.02 115249 3 0.02 114989 btOptimizedBvh.ll 92 201284 17 0.03 195021 6 0.02 199133 btOverlappingPairCache.ll 113 295360 17 0.03 2...