Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "valild".
Did you mean:
valid
2006 Mar 13
3
validation and update
Hi,
I have validation working in a situation similar to the following.
(Please forgive any minor typos below)
class Department < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :people
end
class Person < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :department
validates_presence_of :name
end
@department = Department.new(:name=>"bedrock")
@department.people << Person.new(:name=>"fred")
2017 Jul 11
2
Gluster native mount is really slow compared to nfs
Hello Joe,
?
?
I really appreciate your feedback, but I already tried the opcache stuff (to not valildate at all). It improves of course then, but not completely somehow. Still quite slow.
?
I did not try the mount options yet, but I will now!
?
?
With nfs (doesnt matter much built-in version 3 or ganesha version 4) I can even host the site perfectly fast without these extreme opcache settings.
?...
2017 Jul 11
0
Gluster native mount is really slow compared to nfs
On 07/11/2017 08:14 AM, Jo Goossens wrote:
> RE: [Gluster-users] Gluster native mount is really slow compared to nfs
>
> Hello Joe,
>
> I really appreciate your feedback, but I already tried the opcache
> stuff (to not valildate at all). It improves of course then, but not
> completely somehow. Still quite slow.
>
> I did not try the mount options yet, but I will now!
>
> With nfs (doesnt matter much built-in version 3 or ganesha version 4)
> I can even host the site perfectly fast without these extr...
2017 Jul 11
0
Gluster native mount is really slow compared to nfs
My standard response to someone needing filesystem performance for www
traffic is generally, "you're doing it wrong".
https://joejulian.name/blog/optimizing-web-performance-with-glusterfs/
That said, you might also look at these mount options:
attribute-timeout, entry-timeout, negative-timeout (set to some large
amount of time), and fopen-keep-cache.
On 07/11/2017 07:48 AM, Jo
2017 Jul 11
2
Gluster native mount is really slow compared to nfs
...users] Gluster native mount is really slow compared to nfs
To:Jo Goossens <jo.goossens at hosted-power.com>; gluster-users at gluster.org;
On 07/11/2017 08:14 AM, Jo Goossens wrote:
Hello Joe,
?
?
I really appreciate your feedback, but I already tried the opcache stuff (to not valildate at all). It improves of course then, but not completely somehow. Still quite slow.
?
I did not try the mount options yet, but I will now!
?
?
With nfs (doesnt matter much built-in version 3 or ganesha version 4) I can even host the site perfectly fast without these extreme opcache...
2017 Jul 11
2
Gluster native mount is really slow compared to nfs
Hello,
?
?
Here is the volume info as requested by soumya:
?
#gluster volume info www
?Volume Name: www
Type: Replicate
Volume ID: 5d64ee36-828a-41fa-adbf-75718b954aff
Status: Started
Snapshot Count: 0
Number of Bricks: 1 x 3 = 3
Transport-type: tcp
Bricks:
Brick1: 192.168.140.41:/gluster/www
Brick2: 192.168.140.42:/gluster/www
Brick3: 192.168.140.43:/gluster/www
Options Reconfigured:
2012 Jul 24
14
[RFC 0/9] vhost-scsi: Add support for host virtualized target
From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab at linux-iscsi.org>
Hi Anthony + QEMU storage folks,
The following is a reviewable RFC series of vhost-scsi against yesterday's
QEMU.git/master @ commit 401a66357d.
The series is available directly from:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/nab/qemu-kvm.git vhost-scsi-merge
It contains the squashed + re-ordered patches from Stefan -> Zhi's
2012 Jul 24
14
[RFC 0/9] vhost-scsi: Add support for host virtualized target
From: Nicholas Bellinger <nab at linux-iscsi.org>
Hi Anthony + QEMU storage folks,
The following is a reviewable RFC series of vhost-scsi against yesterday's
QEMU.git/master @ commit 401a66357d.
The series is available directly from:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/nab/qemu-kvm.git vhost-scsi-merge
It contains the squashed + re-ordered patches from Stefan -> Zhi's