Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "moels".
Did you mean:
models
2009 Nov 23
3
3Com 3c940 moel only giving me 100 mb throughput to network switch
Hello all,
As the subject states, I have a 3Com 3c940 Ethernet card to a 1 gb network
switch. The switch detects it, but it only shows that it is giving me 100
mb/sec throughput. That card is rated for 1 GB...is there a way to force
it to try to use 1 GB/sec? System-config-network isn't helping me here.
Thanks for any help!
2015 May 26
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Upstreaming LLVM/SPIR-V converter
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Philip Reames
<listmail at philipreames.com> wrote:
> Let me start by emphasizing that I only speak for myself. This is my
> opinion, and nothing more.
>
> On 05/22/2015 03:55 AM, Neil Henning wrote:
>>
>> 'Maintenance and support obligations' - the only maintenance obligations
>> would be don't regress our tests
2012 Apr 03
4
one master table to hold symbols: good or bad idea?
...I notice that I have a lot of models that contain just a name string:
create_table "natural_resources", :force => true do |t|
t.string "name"
end
create_table "roles", :force => true do |t|
t.string "name"
end
... etc ...
These moels are always joined through a has_many_through relation to
some other object (e.g. User :has_many :roles, :through => :user_roles),
and the names are treated effectively as constant symbols.
So I''m thinking of consolidating these models into a single one:
create_table :symbols, :force...
2006 Jul 06
9
Where to put code - controller or model
I have a Rails app that is a directory indexer. It passes the desired
directory path in the url.
There is a user table, and a permissions table (which contains the
volumes each user has permission to see). There is also a volume table,
which contains the available volumes, and a path table, which contains
the paths to every file available on the machine. [There are other
tables, but these
2015 May 22
3
[LLVMdev] [RFC] Upstreaming LLVM/SPIR-V converter
'Maintenance and support obligations' - the only maintenance obligations
would be don't regress our tests when you change code, that is no
different from doing changes to any other target.
Chandler raised some pretty important points in his reply, and we will
need to address them. In Sam's original email he did say 'We are open to
the SelectionDAG/MC approach if the