search for: impov

What I have so far. In my main HTML: <script type="text/javascript" src="/javascripts/tiny_mce/tiny_mce_src.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> tinyMCE.init({ mode: "textareas", theme: ''advanced'', theme_advanced_toolbar_location: ''top'' }); ... </script> My Ajax form

...gt; > I think the above would take the lock for too long time. That's why we > prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > need. I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > The struct page is used as a "state" to get the next free page block....

...gt; > I think the above would take the lock for too long time. That's why we > prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > need. I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > The struct page is used as a "state" to get the next free page block....

...d take the lock for too long time. That's why we > >>prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > >>also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > >>need. > >I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally > >if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages > >outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is > >dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > > > The caller won't use pages returned f...

...d take the lock for too long time. That's why we > >>prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > >>also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > >>need. > >I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally > >if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages > >outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is > >dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > > > The caller won't use pages returned f...

...e. That's why we > >>>>prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > >>>>also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > >>>>need. > >>>I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally > >>>if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages > >>>outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is > >>>dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > >> > >>The cal...

...e. That's why we > >>>>prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > >>>>also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > >>>>need. > >>>I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally > >>>if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages > >>>outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is > >>>dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > >> > >>The cal...

...The list archive has been more helpful in this regard, but I still have holes in my understanding. Specifically, I'm trying to refine my working system to work even better over high-jitter connections. I'm eager and open to using the jitter buffer as you suggest, and I see how it can impove playback quality in high packet-loss situations considerably, but I haven't yet wrapped my head around what benefit it offers in reliable, high-jitter environments. So far as I can tell, the only solution to jittery transport is an adequate prebuffer, and thus I'm looking for advice on...

...k the above would take the lock for too long time. That's why we >> prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one >> also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we >> need. > I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally > if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages > outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is > dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? The caller won't use pages returned from the function, so I thin...

Platform: Compaq OpenVMS Alpha 7.3 Compiler: Compaq C T6.5 The following patch resolves compile problems with the checksum.c module. The type (char) was being used where the usage indicated either (void) or (unsigned char) should be used. The const qualifier was added to impove compiler efficiency. There may be more cases in this module where type (char) is being used instead of what appears should be (unsigned char). -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only EAGLE> type checksum.gdiff --- ref_src:checksum.c Sat Jan 5 13:27:01 2002 +++ lcl_src:checksum.c...

...ervers to remote offices which have slow links to central LAN with NT4 as PDC, hoping to provide the following :- 1) Local samba fileserver in each office for faster access to shares, which can be rsynch'ed or backed up across the slow links to the central LAN overnight. So far so good :-) 2) Impove logon speed for for users in each office by reducing netlogon share + profile share + SAM traffic over slow links, hmmm, this would normally be the job of an NT BDC but samba 2.x can't do that and it's probably not acceptable to use samba as PDC instead of NT4 :-( What if ..... Install s...

...for too long time. That's why we >>>> prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one >>>> also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we >>>> need. >>> I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally >>> if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages >>> outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is >>> dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? >> >> The caller won't use pag...

...rw-rw-r-- 1 warren warren 121M 11-21 17:24 record.DB -rw-rw-r-- 1 warren warren 6.7K 11-21 17:24 termlist.baseA -rw-rw-r-- 1 warren warren 6.1K 11-21 17:22 termlist.baseB -rw-rw-r-- 1 warren warren 428M 11-21 17:24 termlist.DB too big! is there any problem about my code, and is there any way to impove index speed? thank you

...y we >>>>>> prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one >>>>>> also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we >>>>>> need. >>>>> I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally >>>>> if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages >>>>> outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is >>>>> dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? >>>> The c...

...t;>>>>prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > >>>>>>also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > >>>>>>need. > >>>>>I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally > >>>>>if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages > >>>>>outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is > >>>>>dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > >&...

...t;>>>>prefer to take one free page block each time, and taking it one by one > >>>>>>also doesn't make a difference, in terms of the performance that we > >>>>>>need. > >>>>>I think you should start with simple approach and impove incrementally > >>>>>if this turns out to be not optimal. I really detest taking struct pages > >>>>>outside of the lock. You never know what might happen after the lock is > >>>>>dropped. E.g. can you race with the memory hotremove? > >&...

> -----Original Message----- > From: Les Mikesell [mailto:lesmikesell at gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:25 PM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] How should I reinstall CentOS? > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Michael Hennebry > <hennebry at web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote: > > <SNIP> > > > I'm not willing to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This is a preview release of the Samba 3.0.3 code base and is provided for testing only. This release is *not* intended for production servers. However, there have been several bug fixes and new features added since 3.0.2a that we feel it is important make it available to the Samba community for wider testing. Common bugs fixed in this preview

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This is a preview release of the Samba 3.0.3 code base and is provided for testing only. This release is *not* intended for production servers. However, there have been several bug fixes and new features added since 3.0.2a that we feel it is important make it available to the Samba community for wider testing. Common bugs fixed in this preview

Dear all, I want to improve my adj - R sq. I 've chequed some established models and they introduce two times the same variable, one transformed, and the other not. It also improves my adj - R sq. But, isn't this bad for the collinearity? Do I interpret coefficients as usual? Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 1.73140 7.22477 0.240