search for: quantified

Hi all, I'm trying to understand and quantify network traffic for a 32 node high performance OCFS2 installation. Part of what I'm doing is attempting to size the network hardware requirements. To do this I need some help understanding the kinds and amounts of traffic generated during "normal" use. Once populated, the system will have a very high READ to WRITE op ratio. I

Hi, I encountered a problem about volatile quantifier when using llvm-gcc, here is the example: #define N 10 int sum(volatile int a[N]) { int sum = 0; unsigned i = 0; for (i = 0; i < N; ++i) sum += a[i]; return sum; } If I compile it as C code, then llvm-gcc will dump: define i32 @sum(i32* nocapture %a) nounwind { bb1.thread: %0 = volatile load i32* %a, align 4

This looks wrong to me, though the x86 backend produces code that does the right thing (reads each element once). If you change the code (see below) to read each element twice, llvm-gcc still does the right thing but llvm-g++ does not (i.e. it fails to read aech location twice). Current versions of gcc/g++ also look wrong. All 4 compilers (gcc,g++,llvm-gcc,llvm-g++) do the right thing when

On 8/1/24 20:55, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > Thanks Tomas.? Do note that my original post also mentioned a bug or > doc error in the PCRE docs for this regexp: > >> ? - perl = TRUE does *not* give the documented result on at least one >> system (which is "123456789", because "{,5}" is documented to not be >> a quantifier, so it should only match the

Hi there, I have two series of data. plotting the density function of both gives me an idea about the difference of the data. But I would like to quantify the difference I see. a <- rnorm(100) b <- rnorm(100) da <- density(a) db <- density(b) The problem is that da$x and db$x are different and so I have difficulties to compare them... Is there any way to force the density

On 2016-01-13 10:18, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: <snip> > I would be good if libvirt could routinely test the case of multiple > parallel launches of qemu:///session, since it still contains bugs > even after Cole's fixes. Sounds like this testing script would be useful as a (weekly?) cronjob or similar. :) + Justin

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:12:30AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > The difference comes in the restore step - where we blow away the > readonly label and put it back to the original. For disks we never > restore readonly/shared labels, but for kernels we do. If we just > kill the restore step for kernels too, we should be fine AFAICT. Works for me - I can try a patch, or if you can

FYI I'm testing the attached patch (written by Jiri Denemark). The tests usually take a day to run. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any software inside the virtual machine. Supports Linux and Windows.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:54:29PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > FYI I'm testing the attached patch (written by Jiri Denemark). The > tests usually take a day to run. Yes this patch appears to fix all the problems. Can it be applied to libvirt? Rich. > diff --git i/src/security/security_dac.c w/src/security/security_dac.c > index 80709fe..378b922 100644 > ---

Dear R-Users, my objective is to measure the overlap/divergence of two probability density functions, p1(x) and p2(x). One could apply the chi-square test or determine the potential mixture components and then compare the respective means and sigmas. But I was rather looking for a simple measure of similarity. Therefore, I used the concept of 'intrinsic discrepancy' which is defined as:

I was up late last night, and i had a thought on peeling that would probably provide 100% accurate peeling data to a decoder, but take a maximum of 1101 times normal time to encode (taking into account the range from q-1 to q10 ). ay you want to encode a track at q10, but you want it to be peelable. the 1101 encoder would encode from the source at every quantifiable level (since there are 2

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:51:47AM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 16:25:14 +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:18:42AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > >As people may know, we frequently encounter errors caused by libvirt > > >when running the libguestfs appliance. > > > > > >I wanted to find out

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 04:25:14PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote: > For each of the kernels, libvirt labels them (with both DAC and selinux > labels), then proceeds to launching qemu. If this is done parallel, the > race is pretty obvious. Could you remind me why you couldn't use > <seclabel model='none'/> or <seclabel relabel='no'/> or something that

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:18:42AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >As people may know, we frequently encounter errors caused by libvirt >when running the libguestfs appliance. > >I wanted to find out exactly how frequently these happen and classify >the errors, so I ran the 'virt-df' tool overnight 1700 times. This >tool runs several parallel qemu:///session libvirt

On 01/13/2016 05:18 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > As people may know, we frequently encounter errors caused by libvirt > when running the libguestfs appliance. > > I wanted to find out exactly how frequently these happen and classify > the errors, so I ran the 'virt-df' tool overnight 1700 times. This > tool runs several parallel qemu:///session libvirt connections

The interpretation of regular expressions with repetition quantifiers in the 'gregexpr' function seems to have changed between R Version 2.2.0 and 2.3.0. The 'gsub' function, however, gives the same results in R Versions 2.2.0 and 2.3.0. Below is an example that demonstrates the version differences of the 'gregexpr' function. I am not sure whether this new behavior is

Thanks Tomas. Do note that my original post also mentioned a bug or doc error in the PCRE docs for this regexp: > - perl = TRUE does *not* give the documented result on at least one > system (which is "123456789", because "{,5}" is documented to not be a > quantifier, so it should only match the literal string "{,5}"). Duncan On 2024-08-01 6:49 a.m.,

..., which isn't clear). OTOH, it looks like a lot of > real-world software that is using LLVM already doesn't seem to be > affected by the lack of them. LLVM's current choice is safe for all applications. The trapping behavior would be a really nice addition, though. Has anyone quantified the optimizations afforded by undefined signed overflow? I'd expect that the benefits are minimal for most codes. On the other hand I've seen reports that gcc's -fwrapv hurts performance of gcc output significantly. I'm not sure if that is true. Also, it could be the case th...

On 01/14/2016 05:12 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:51:47AM +0100, Jiri Denemark wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 16:25:14 +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:18:42AM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>> As people may know, we frequently encounter errors caused by libvirt >>>> when running the

What software exists for digitizing video to quantify the motion of specific features in the image? I might be willing to use something that's NOT in R, though I'd prefer something in R (or at least with an R intereface). Thanks, Spencer Graves