search for: disproving

I run a decent amount of 3ware hardware, all under centos-4. There seems to be some sort of fundamental disagreement between ext3 and 3ware's hardware RAID5 mode that trashes write performance. As a representative example, one current setup is 2 9550SX-12 boards in hardware RAID5 mode (256KB stripe size) with a software RAID0 stripe on top (also 256KB chunks). bonnie++ results look

Could anyone please explain how to set up contrasts between means in R. I want to know if "before I conduct an experiment and believe the mean for 1 and 2 will be different from means 3 and 4, Is this true?" That is what I have to prove or disprove, I thought that contrasts would be the way to go. Thanks for the help. Igor [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Dear all, I was doing an experiment to disprove some theory therefore performing lot of random simulation. Goal is to show the audience that although something has very rare chance to occur but it doesn't mean that event would be impossible. In this case after getting that rare event I need to show that same scenario for multiple times to explain other audience. Hence I need to somehow

...d one confusion. My confusion related to your naming of the two instructions as A and B. It's consistent all through LoopDependenceAnalysis. I'd prefer something like source and destination, so I can keep track of which is which. It didn't matter so much when you were simply proving or disproving dependence, but when you compute direction, it's suddenly crucial. The problem is the computation of direction from distance. The code says: if (distance->isZero()) S->Direction = Subscript::EQ; else if (isGT) S->Direction = Subscript::GT; else S->Direction = Subscript::LT;...

Wojtek, If you like, I can help guide this SoC project. I would also like to see if we can coordinate with Alex and Albert, who are doing the class project here. As a first comment, your 3 layers are a good organization but two comments: 1. Layer 1 shd also look at loop bounds and array bounds: those can be used to disprove some deps. 2. The interface will also need to compute direction and

On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 16:10 -0400, Justin Foreman wrote: > Okay. The master build worked on the join. Excellent. So it was 4.8.0 having a problem. > > I’ve attempted to join 2008 R2 now to 4.8.0 but it still blue screens. Should I start a new thread for clarity’s sake? So, I think this, the upgrade issues and even the old servicePrincipalName handling bug is all the same thing. What

Hello: I am planning to implement GFS for my university as a summer project. I have 10 servers each with SAN disks attached. I will be reading and writing many files for professor's research projects. Each file can be anywhere from 1k to 120GB (fluid dynamic research images). The 10 servers will be using NIC bonding (1GB/network). So, would GFS be ideal for this? I have been reading a lot

I just installed Cygwin / OpenSSH / rsync on two Dell PowerVault 745N NASes running Windows 2003 Appliance Edition. My rsync daemons are running, ssh works, and in theory all is well. But... I'm getting an average of maybe 15 Mb/s rsyncing between them. Now, I know I have an issue in the way they're connected... one is attached to a Cisco 2970 (1 Gb/s), which is attached to a NetGear

Hi folks, For the past month I’ve been working on improving the DominatorTree and PostDominatorTree in LLVM. The RFC that explains the motivations and plans can be found here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-June/114045.html . Here’s a short summary of what changed upstream since posting it: - We switched from the Simple Lengauer-Tarjan algorithm for computing dominators

I have a coworker, who''s primary expertise is in another flavor of Unix. This coworker lists floating point operations as one of ZFS detriments. I''s not really sure what he means specifically, or where he got this reference from. In an effort to refute what I believe is an error or misunderstanding on his part, I have spent time on Yahoo, Google, the ZFS section of

Is there a sensible way for me to manually remove the duplicate SPNs in the mean time? Justin > On Mar 17, 2018, at 3:09 PM, Andrew Bartlett <abartlet at samba.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 2018-03-17 at 07:34 +1300, Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical > wrote: >> On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 16:10 -0400, Justin Foreman wrote: >>> Okay. The master build worked on the join.

Hello, I am running Samba 2.2.2 with acl-0.7.16 on RedHat 6.2 (2.2.19). The PDC is a Windows 2000 Server and the Samba server is a domain member using Winbind. All the workstations are Windoze 2000 Pro with SP2. Everything seemingly works fine but every day or two I get a runaway SMBD process which hogs the CPU and becomes unkillable. The only resolution is to reboot the server completely.

Valmico <valmico88 at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm currently trying to develop new LLVM Pass that will generate > simple data dependencies graph. For now I'm trying to get familiar > with DependenceAnalysis. > My general idea is to traverse each function (runOnFunction) > top to bottom Instruction by Instruction, using DA.depends( I, I2, ...) > on every Instructions

Thank you for your reply. It's not that simple, though. Just because some core algorithms are standardised and should be compatible doesn't mean their use in different implementations leads to interoperable data. The key point here seems to be that Dovecot just supports SHA-1 with PBKDF2, not SHA-256. So I'm out of luck here. The different formats are no longer relevant then.

To whom it may concern, I happened to run the following R code just to check the layout of the output, but found that the code doesn't work the way I thought it should work. '' > lm(rnorm(100) ~ rnorm(100)) Call: lm(formula = rnorm(100) ~ rnorm(100)) Coefficients: (Intercept) -0.07966 Warning messages: 1: In model.matrix.default(mt, mf, contrasts) : the response appeared

1. ————— Dan, The reasoning given below for how GVN operates seems odd to me, Poison is an attribute of a value, just like nsw is an attribute of an operation, So when GVN sees a pair of equal values, one of which has an extra attribute, The proper choice for representative value is the one without the attribute, Just like when GVN sees a pair of add operations, one of which has an

Hello all, I''m new to Mongrel and am very impressed with what I see so far. This thing beats FastCGI hands down, and is even simpler to use than SCGI. Great job Zed! Thanks for all the hard work. I am a bit surprised at the memory usage patterns though. I''m not sure if I''m doing something wrong (most likely I am), or if this is a problem with the app I''m

Daniel, Thanks for taking the time to respond. Regarding GVN and newGVN, I recently finished a search through the llvm-dev archives for “nsw” in the subject line, and GVN was discussed in some of those threads [1]. In particular it was claimed that there was a right choice for GVN to make given two ADD instructions, one with the “nsw” attribute and one without, the one without ‘nsw’

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13692 Bug ID: 13692 Summary: Coverity scan for rsync-3.1.3 Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core Assignee: wayned at samba.org Reporter: mruprich at

> Which version of gcc are you using? I know that only recently has gcc > made itself compatible with the C++ name mangling standard, whatever > that is. I have no idea if MSVC++ is compatible with it. It was essentially my own mistake. After the Embedded C++ IDE crashed unexpectedly, the .lib file was no longer present in the project settings (the project had not been saved) so all