search for: pessimists

Hi guys, I must be missing something obvious with pessimistic locking. Here is what I do (Rails 2.3, mySQL): In my Foo model: def test Foo.transaction do lock = UpdateLockForFoo.find_by_foo_id(self.id, :lock => true) sleep 30 end end For each Foo model, I have an UpdateLockForFoo. This "lock" needs to be acquired before doing any changes to Foo. I believe it works,

After installing the PessimisticLocking plugin I noticed that ActiveRecord''s count method no longer works (see below). If I remove the plugin it resolves the problem. I need both. Any ideas? I have also read that Pessimistic Locking is now baked into ActiveRecord in Edge Rails. I have tried Rails 1.1.2 and 1.1.4 and that doesn''t seem to be the case. Any idea when

Hi, How can I upgrade my rails 1.1.6 & activerecord 1.14.4 with the pessimistic locking feature, described in http://wiki.rubyonrails.com/rails/pages/Pessimistic+Locking+Plugin/versions/3? Regards ID --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group,

Hi! Say we have a rails active-record-based model called "instance" which can have different states - STOPPED, RUNNING, STARTING_UP, SHUTTING_DOWN, etc... There is a method #start which changes the instance state to STARTING_UP only if it is STOPPED. def start if self.state == STOPPED self.state = STARTING_UP self.save ... end end As you understand if we have multiple

Hello, Anyone else noticed that zpool is kind of negative when reporting back from some error conditions? Like: cannot import ''zpool01'': I/O error Destroy and re-create the pool from a backup source. or even worse: cannot import ''rpool'': pool already exists Destroy and re-create the pool from a backup source. The first one i

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 03:30:22PM +0400, lvqcl wrote: > BTW, what can you say about the following place in stream_decoder.c > in read_subframe_lpc_() function: > > /*@@@@@@ technically not pessimistic enough, should be more like > if( (FLAC__uint64)order * ((((FLAC__uint64)1)<<bps)-1) * ((1<<subframe->qlp_coeff_precision)-1) < (((FLAC__uint64)-1)

In the precompute_partition_info_sums_ function, instead of selecting 64-bit accumulator when the signal bps is larger than 16, revert to the original approach based on partition size, but make room for few extra bits to not overflow with unusual signals where the average residual magnitude may be larger than bps. It slightly improves the performance with standard encoding levels and 16-bit files

Hello... I am trying to switch to mongrel from webrick to get rid of the . puppetmaster is FreeBSD 6.2 with ruby, puppet, and mongrel all from ports (latest as of this morning). I get "Server is not a class". --verbose, --debug do not spit out any useful info. puppet-0.22.4 ruby-1.8.6.111_1,1 ruby18-bdb46-0.6.2 ruby18-gems-0.9.4 rubygem-daemons-1.0.8 rubygem-fastthread-1.0

Hi Arnaud, On Wed, 22 Mar 2017, Arnaud Quette wrote: > The technique is very general and is to send SIGUSR1/SIGUSR2 to the upsd daemon.? SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2 are events just like ONBATT and ONLINE. > The patch runs successfully on my opensuse 13.2 box, and solves my problem. In upssched.conf I now have declarations such as > > ? ?AT SIGUSR1 * CANCEL-TIMER

On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 03:54:06PM -0600, Zube wrote: > > Le 28/10/2018 ? 22:10, Albert McCann a ?crit?: > > > > Red Hat would stay as a distinct entity inside IBM. IBM has also > > contributed to Free software, and especially Linux kernel. > > I don't know how bad it is and the implications for CentOS... > > That old war wound started aching again. >

What are the correct target description side effect flags for instructions which may trap (e.g. divide / remainder)? The divide instruction in my backend currently has no flags set. I've enabled the MachineLICM pass and it's causing a miscompilation by hoisting a divide by zero instruction out of the loop. Clearly this pass needs to be made aware that this is not safe. The current

After I spend some time working with the function attribute* deduction pass** [1,3], I would like to propose a "proper" organization***. Why? Because we do not derive nearly as many attributes as we could****, while we do maintain various (separate and diffently organized) "data-flow-like analyses" to do so. What else? I propose a single optimistic data-flow

Theodore Ts'o <tytso at mit.edu> writes: > The current virtio block sets a queue depth of 64, which is > insufficient for very fast devices. It has been demonstrated that > with a high IOPS device, using a queue depth of 256 can double the > IOPS which can be sustained. > > As suggested by Venkatash Srinivas, set the queue depth by default to > be one half the the

Theodore Ts'o <tytso at mit.edu> writes: > The current virtio block sets a queue depth of 64, which is > insufficient for very fast devices. It has been demonstrated that > with a high IOPS device, using a queue depth of 256 can double the > IOPS which can be sustained. > > As suggested by Venkatash Srinivas, set the queue depth by default to > be one half the the

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Raul Silvera" <rsilvera at google.com> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "Chandler Carruth" <chandlerc at google.com>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:26:57 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Upcoming

I'm working on the post-regalloc dataflow engine I mentioned yesterday. Currently I only need to track register operands. A MachineOperand has both a getReg() and a getSubReg() interface. For a physical register operand, is getReg() guaranteed to be the "most super" register with getSubReg() providing the specific subregister information for the operand? If so then for my current

Hello, I am trying to extract a callgraph using DSA, but the analysis looks quite pessimistic. I use TDD analysis and here is my test code: #include <stdlib.h> typedef void (*tX)(int a, int b); typedef void (*tY)(int a); typedef struct { tX p ; int n; } msg; static void A1(int a) { } static void B2(int a, int b) { } static void C2(int a, int b) { } tY q; static void decode(tX

Hi Dag 2010/2/28 Dag Atle Nettum <dagatle at innit.no> > Hello > > > > I understand you are the project leader of Nut. > > > > In my company we have a Eaton 9135 6000 UPS, we are running NUT 2.4.1 > (Debian squeeze) > > > > The ups is connected with a USB cable but it reports a temperature of 300 > degredes. > > > > Can I send you

Hello... I need some help with tags. as an example: # pseudo code class ssh { file { "/etc/ssh/ssh_config": # normal stuff tag("dangerous") } file { "/etc/ssh/sshd_config": # normal stuff tag("dangerous") } file { "/etc/ssh/ssh_known_hosts": # normal stuff tag("safe") } } on client: puppetd --tags

Hi all, I have been writing a pass to heapify some alloca's (it is pessimistization, not optimization). For example, in the following control flow graph, there is a call to malloc inserted in block BB12. In order to avoid memory leak, free's are needed. The free cannot be inserted in BB23 because BB23 is not dominated by BB12. There are two ways to go I can think of here. One way is to