search for: c36

...%DE%D3%1B%89%1Et%94R%ECQ%ADd%04%8D=r%92%9AZ%5E%98%C4%1F%F9%9F%06%FF%AB%5E%BC%D7@ - HIER_NONE/- text/html 1581432557.219????? 0 10.5.8.17 TAG_NONE/400 4570 NONE error:invalid-request - HIER_NONE/- text/html 1581432557.326????? 0 10.5.8.17 TAG_NONE/400 4288? %A8O%FBmW%E4%97%9E%7C%FC%C4 at T8S%BA3%19%C36%9E%9C%E5%CBt%1F%C3&.7%14%C2 - HIER_NONE/- text/html 1581432557.433????? 0 10.5.8.17 TAG_NONE/400 4260? ?9a%AB%8E%ECh-w%1C%C3%5D%084x%0F*%1Efw%D7+%0ED%7D%92%94%06%DA%EC%BB; - HIER_NONE/- text/html 1581432557.540????? 0 10.5.8.17 TAG_NONE/400 4298? %C5%EA?%A6%11t.%DE%FC%%C8%82o%C0%F49%BCFX%C4%D0%...

On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 05:29:24PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 5:07 PM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > > These ones? > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-August/msg00078.html > > No, we had a bug when copying image from glance caused sanlock timeouts > because of the unpredictable page cache flushes. > > We

...ioned is: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1832967 > > This explains the issue: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1247135#c29 > > And here you can how unrelated I/O is affected by uncontrolled flushes: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1247135#c30 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1247135#c36 Thanks for the explanation. Our use of file_flush (ie fdatasync) is less than ideal - we should probably use sync_file_range, which is what Linus suggested. However in this case it won't be a problem because we're only flushing the few pages we have just written. We control the file and...

...r unconfrolled flushes. The bug I mentioned is: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1832967 This explains the issue: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1247135#c29 And here you can how unrelated I/O is affected by uncontrolled flushes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1247135#c30 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1247135#c36 Here we compare oflag=nocache,dsync with oflag=direct for NFS and iSCSI disks: https://gerrit.ovirt.org/c/108912/ cahe=none now is basically oflag=nocache,dsync > > Rich. > > -- > Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones > Read my programmin...

Hi Jack, On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Jack Howarth <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > What are the acceptable performance regressions in the generated > code for a llvm release? We seem to be badly regressed in some > benchmarks (which I first noticed from the review of 3.6-rc1 at > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm-clang-3.5-3.6-rc1).

On 02/18/2015 03:01 PM, Renato Golin wrote: > So it seems that you're one of the very few people that doesn't use > ToT. Almost everyone else uses it and the progress of LLVM kind of > assume you do. My company also does not use ToT. Being able to associate a product with a well-known release is *very* important to us. It enables communication with our customers. It allows

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50121 Bug #: 50121 Summary: [Regression] NV34 Fx5200 fails to resume with commit 5d720f2450 Classification: Unclassified Product: xorg Version: git Platform: x86 (IA32) OS/Version: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: