search for: aggregrated

Hi, the ArgumentPromotion pass replaces aggregrate function arguments by multiple individual arguments. The default pass only does this when the aggregrate has 3 or less elements, otherwise the code will be unchanged. I have a need to always promote aggregrate arguments, even when there are a lot of them. The attached patch adds a "maxElements" argument to ArgPromotion's

Hi all, I've been implementing some stuff that uses the new structs-as-firstclass values code. Apart from some implementation problems, I'm spotting a few structural problems that seem non-trivial to fix. In particular, now that structs are a first class values, the old way or returning multiple values is a bit confusing. The old way had a variable number of arguments to the return

Hi, I have to recognize that i don't fully understand the aggregate function, but i think it should help me with what i want to do. xveg is a data.frame with location, species, and total for the species. Each location is repeated, once for every species present at that location. For each location i want to find out which species has the maximum total ... so i've tried different ways to

On May 30, 2008, at 9:11 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been implementing some stuff that uses the new structs-as- > firstclass > values code. Apart from some implementation problems, I'm spotting a > few > structural problems that seem non-trivial to fix. Hi, thanks for your interest! > Furthermore, as far as I've understood, the

Hello R experts, I'm trying to test R in a shared memory environment in which addressable memory is aggregrated to about 600G. However, I get an error of 'too many elements' specified when I try creating a 45K x 100K matrix. I tried running R with a --max-nsize=50000000000 option, but got the same message. Is there a way to run create such large matrices? thanks, Paul Rodriguez

...code? Sounds like a pretty weak argument when adding kernel ABI is at > > stake... > > I am still not clear on the need for the extra netdev created by > virtio_net. The only advantage i can see is that the stats can be > broken between VF and virtio datapaths compared to the aggregrated > stats on virtio netdev as seen with the 2 netdev approach. Maybe you're not convinced but multiple arguments were made. > With 2 netdev model, any VM image that has a working network > configuration will transparently get VF based acceleration without > any changes. Nothing h...

Hi Dan, > Yes, the intention is that getresult will be removed once first-class > aggregates are a ready replacement. This won't leave LLVM missing the > concept of returning multiple values; a struct can be thought of as > a container for multiple values. I'm not saying we don't have some way of modeling multiple return values, I'm sayin the explicit concept

On Sat, 27 Jan 2018 00:14:20 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 01:46:42PM -0800, Siwei Liu wrote: > > > and the VM is not expected to do any tuning/optimizations on the VF driver > > > directly, > > > i think the current patch that follows the netvsc model of 2 netdevs(virtio > > > and vf) should > > > work fine. > >

Hi everyone, I am writing a simple script to read in a data file, search through the data file for an exact character match for a microRNA name, subset those rows, and aggregrate a dataframe with those subselections all in a for loop. This is what I have so far: #READ IN DATA file1 = "C:/Desktop/mirtarget2_predictions.txt" data = read.table(file1, header=FALSE, sep="\t")

Hi, I am trying to use the update_attributes on object with nested attributes and I am getting the following error: ProductPrice expected, got HashWithIndifferentAccess Here''s the situation (simplified): class Product < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :productPrice end class ProductPrice < ActiveRecord::Base has_one :product, :dependent => true

...e extra 300 lines of > code? Sounds like a pretty weak argument when adding kernel ABI is at > stake... I am still not clear on the need for the extra netdev created by virtio_net. The only advantage i can see is that the stats can be broken between VF and virtio datapaths compared to the aggregrated stats on virtio netdev as seen with the 2 netdev approach. With 2 netdev model, any VM image that has a working network configuration will transparently get VF based acceleration without any changes. 3 netdev model breaks this configuration starting with the creation and naming of the 2 devices...

It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk on a KVM guest running on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were as follows: 69.75% 0.59% fio [k] down_write 69.15% 0.01% fio [k] call_rwsem_down_write_failed 67.12% 1.12% fio [k] rwsem_down_write_failed 63.48% 52.77% fio [k] osq_lock 9.46% 7.88% fio [k]

It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk on a KVM guest running on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were as follows: 69.75% 0.59% fio [k] down_write 69.15% 0.01% fio [k] call_rwsem_down_write_failed 67.12% 1.12% fio [k] rwsem_down_write_failed 63.48% 52.77% fio [k] osq_lock 9.46% 7.88% fio [k]

It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk on a VM running on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were as follows: 69.75% 0.59% fio [k] down_write 69.15% 0.01% fio [k] call_rwsem_down_write_failed 67.12% 1.12% fio [k] rwsem_down_write_failed 63.48% 52.77% fio [k] osq_lock 9.46% 7.88% fio [k]

It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk on a VM running on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were as follows: 69.75% 0.59% fio [k] down_write 69.15% 0.01% fio [k] call_rwsem_down_write_failed 67.12% 1.12% fio [k] rwsem_down_write_failed 63.48% 52.77% fio [k] osq_lock 9.46% 7.88% fio [k]

...weak argument when adding kernel ABI is at > > > stake... > > > > I am still not clear on the need for the extra netdev created by > > virtio_net. The only advantage i can see is that the stats can be > > broken between VF and virtio datapaths compared to the aggregrated > > stats on virtio netdev as seen with the 2 netdev approach. > > Maybe you're not convinced but multiple arguments were made. > > > With 2 netdev model, any VM image that has a working network > > configuration will transparently get VF based acceleration witho...

I'm very new to R, so please forgive me if I just missed the answer in existing documentation... I have a data set with at least three columns, X, Y, and Z. I want to produce a chart where one axis shows all the unique values of X, and the other axis shows all the unique values of Y. Each cell within the chart should contain the result of applying an aggregate function (such as mean(), for

On Jun 2, 2008, at 8:45 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: > Hi Dan, > >> Yes, the intention is that getresult will be removed once first-class >> aggregates are a ready replacement. This won't leave LLVM missing the >> concept of returning multiple values; a struct can be thought of as >> a container for multiple values. > I'm not saying we don't have some

...Sounds like a pretty weak argument when adding kernel ABI is at >>> stake... >> I am still not clear on the need for the extra netdev created by >> virtio_net. The only advantage i can see is that the stats can be >> broken between VF and virtio datapaths compared to the aggregrated >> stats on virtio netdev as seen with the 2 netdev approach. > Maybe you're not convinced but multiple arguments were made. All the arguments seem to either saying that semantically this doesn't look like a bond OR suggesting usecases that this patch is not trying to solve. This...

It was found when running fio sequential write test with a XFS ramdisk on a 2-socket x86-64 system, the %CPU times as reported by perf were as follows: 71.27% 0.28% fio [k] down_write 70.99% 0.01% fio [k] call_rwsem_down_write_failed 69.43% 1.18% fio [k] rwsem_down_write_failed 65.51% 54.57% fio [k] osq_lock 9.72% 7.99% fio [k] __raw_callee_save___kvm_vcpu_is_preempted 4.16%