search for: theshold

Hello all, I am working with a 1000x1000 matrix, and I would like to return a 1000x1000 matrix that tells me which value in the matrix is greater than a theshold value (1 or 0 indicator). i have tried mat2<-as.matrix(as.numeric(mat1>0.25)) but that returns a 1:100000 matrix. I have also tried for loops, but they are grossly inefficient. THanks for all your help in advance. Lanre

...h, last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file *filp, void __user *argp) context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...h, last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file *filp, void __user *argp) context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...need to know how often weight in a certain position brings the cumulative sums equal or above the given threshold 'q'. In other words, how often each weight is decisive in raising the cumulative sum above 'q'? Here is what I do: w <- c(3,2,1) # vector of weights q <- 4 # theshold # computes which coordinate of w is decisive in each permutation res <- sapply( permn(w), function(x) which(w == x[min(which(cumsum(x) >= q))]) ) # complies the frequencies prop.table( tabulate( res )) The problem I have is that when the weights are not unique, the which() function retu...

...ven if the host has indicated it doesn't want to know. This seemed like a good idea at the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host immediately. Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is refilled constantly. We should introduce real notification thesholds to replace this logic. Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are outgoing parts of the new buffer. It even makes a difference with lguest's crappy network implementation: 1GB guest->host before: 30.0844 1GB...

...ven if the host has indicated it doesn't want to know. This seemed like a good idea at the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host immediately. Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is refilled constantly. We should introduce real notification thesholds to replace this logic. Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are outgoing parts of the new buffer. It even makes a difference with lguest's crappy network implementation: 1GB guest->host before: 30.0844 1GB...

...to know. This seemed like a good idea at > the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host > immediately. > > Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is > refilled constantly. We should introduce real notification thesholds > to replace this logic. Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks > the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are > outgoing parts of the new buffer. > > Here are the number of exits with lguest's crappy network imple...

...to know. This seemed like a good idea at > the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host > immediately. > > Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is > refilled constantly. We should introduce real notification thesholds > to replace this logic. Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks > the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are > outgoing parts of the new buffer. > > Here are the number of exits with lguest's crappy network imple...

...e of 4 or bigger in 100 samples of norm(0,1) gives > 1-exp(log(pnorm(4,0,1))*100) [1] 0.003162164 If I have more than 1 sample above outlier threshold the math is a bit more complicated but doable. My questions are 1) are there better ways to assess probablity of outliers (ie value(s) above theshold from a given distribution)? 2) are they implimented in r? (I checked outlier and extreme in r help and found nothing helpful) thanx bob sandefur -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ...

...= move_len) { > + i -= move_len; > *goal_bit = i; > *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; > break; > @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file *filp, void __user *argp) > > context->range = &range; > > + /* > + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation > + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. > + * any thought? > + */ > + if (!range.me_threshold) > + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; > + > + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) > + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inod...

...ocfs2_probe_alloc_group(stru last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...ocfs2_probe_alloc_group(stru last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...ocfs2_probe_alloc_group(stru last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...ocfs2_probe_alloc_group(stru last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...ocfs2_probe_alloc_group(stru last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1022,18 +1023,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...ocfs2_probe_alloc_group(stru last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1030,18 +1031,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...ocfs2_probe_alloc_group(stru last_free_bits++; if (last_free_bits == move_len) { + i -= move_len; *goal_bit = i; *phys_cpos = base_cpos + i; break; @@ -1020,18 +1021,19 @@ int ocfs2_ioctl_move_extents(struct file context->range = &range; + /* + * ok, the default theshold for the defragmentation + * is 1M, since our maximum clustersize was 1M also. + * any thought? + */ + if (!range.me_threshold) + range.me_threshold = 1024 * 1024; + + if (range.me_threshold > i_size_read(inode)) + range.me_threshold = i_size_read(inode); + if (range.me_flags & OCFS2_M...

...good idea at > > > the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host > > > immediately. > > > Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is > > > refilled constantly. We should introduce real notification thesholds > > > to replace this logic. Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks > > > the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are > > > outgoing parts of the new buffer. > > > Here are the number of exits with lgue...

...good idea at > > > the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host > > > immediately. > > > Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is > > > refilled constantly. We should introduce real notification thesholds > > > to replace this logic. Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks > > > the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are > > > outgoing parts of the new buffer. > > > Here are the number of exits with lgue...

...e a good idea at >>> the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host >>> immediately. >>> Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is >>> refilled constantly. We should introduce real notification thesholds >>> to replace this logic. Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks >>> the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are >>> outgoing parts of the new buffer. >>> Here are the number of exits with lguest...