similar to: Dump problem on USB drive

My aim is to install a standalone node on the following hardware & run the management server in one of it's VMs. Dell Poweredge 2950 PERC 6/i RAID0 6x: 25G / 1T / 4.4T Dual Xeon 5470 quad-core 3.3GHz / 20G RAM Dual onboard Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 NICs I downloaded the [1]oVirt Node 1.0.2-1.fc11.x86_64 iso from the [2]website & boot in standalone mode per [3]instructions on the

Hello list, I recently enabled shared storage on a working cluster with nfs-ganesha and am just storing my ganesha.conf file there so that all 4 nodes can access it(baby steps).? It was all working great for a couple of weeks until I was alerted that /run/gluster/shared_storage was full, see below.? There was no warning; it went from fine to critical overnight.

Hello, So, I just got through a very stressful couple of hours. I''ve been running a rails application for a few months on a dedicated server. The application isn''t really that intensive and has been serving roughly 50k requests / day. It''s been handling really well, really fast, and all is good. The deployment configuration I am using is apache 2.2.3 with

How to configure Diskless environment in CentOS 5.1. Please help me out Regards, Gopinath M Signal Networks Pvt. Ltd. Smile... it increases your face value! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080410/bf9d216c/attachment-0001.html>

Now that we can gather diagnostic info, I think I know why our P2Vs kept failing last week. Another one just died right in front of my eyes. I think either the Ethernet or NFS server at this site occasionally "blips" offline when it gets busy and that messes up P2V migrations. The RHEV export domain is an NFS share offered by an old Storagetek NAS, connected over a 10/100 Ethernet.

On Dec 8, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Jakob Stoklund Olesen wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:33 AM, Evan Cheng wrote: > >> This caused a massive slow down to post-ra scheduler (llc -O3 on x86, -O2 on ARM). I'm going to revert it for now until it has been addressed. > > Probably caused by this member: > > /// KillIndices - The index of the most recent kill (proceding

Hi all, Currently, the LLVM IR uses a binary value (SingleThread/CrossThread) to represent synchronization scope on atomic instructions. We would like to enhance the representation of memory scopes in LLVM IR to allow more values than just the current two. The intention of this email is to invite comments on our proposal. There are some discussion before and it can be found here:

Hi Eli, >>> Icmp sgt is correct. >> >> while ugt would be wrong, I think sgt is too! >> >> For example, suppose %buf is 0 and %bufLen is ~0U. Then %add.ptr is ~0U, and >> %cmp is true, so control branches to %if.then. However in the optimized version >> %cmp is false and control branches to %if.end. >> >> The GEP does have an inbounds

ioemu: fix xenfb slow case update Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@eu.citrix.com> diff -r 067d8f19e78a tools/ioemu/hw/xenfb.c --- a/tools/ioemu/hw/xenfb.c Thu Feb 28 13:55:37 2008 +0000 +++ b/tools/ioemu/hw/xenfb.c Fri Feb 29 15:25:17 2008 +0000 @@ -1072,7 +1072,7 @@ /* A convenient function for munging pixels between different depths */ #define

Hi Chris, > Icmp sgt is correct. while ugt would be wrong, I think sgt is too! For example, suppose %buf is 0 and %bufLen is ~0U. Then %add.ptr is ~0U, and %cmp is true, so control branches to %if.then. However in the optimized version %cmp is false and control branches to %if.end. The GEP does have an inbounds attribute, I'm not sure if that is relevant here. Ciao, Duncan. Note

hi, I compile a case (test.c) to get IR file (test.ll) using clang as follows: "clang -emit-llvm -S -O2 test.c -o test.ll" My clang source code version is release 3.3 and debugging build. //test.c int foo(int j) { return ++j > 0; } int main() { if (foo(((~0U)>>1))) abort(); exit(0) } //end test.c Here are the generated IR file: //test.ll ;

hi, mutt -f imap://max at test.local@127.0.0.1 Could not connect to 127.0.0.1 (Connection refused). lsof -i dovecot 20200 root 5u IPv4 233361 TCP localhost:imap2 (LISTEN) imap-logi 20204 dovecot 0u IPv4 233361 TCP localhost:imap2 (LISTEN) imap-logi 20205 dovecot 0u IPv4 233361 TCP localhost:imap2 (LISTEN) imap-logi 20206 dovecot 0u IPv4 233361 TCP

This caused a massive slow down to post-ra scheduler (llc -O3 on x86, -O2 on ARM). I'm going to revert it for now until it has been addressed. Evan On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:39 AM, Dan Gohman wrote: > > On Dec 7, 2009, at 11:15 AM, Pekka Jääskeläinen wrote: > >> Here's the actual patch, sorry ;) > > Applied in r90789. > > Dan > > >

Hi all, Attached is a sequence of patches that changes the IR to support more than two synchronization scopes. This is still a work in progress, and these patches are only meant to start a more detailed discussion on the way forward. One big issue is the absence of any backend that actually makes use of intermediate synchronization scopes. This work is meant to be just one part of the

On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 3:47 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Hi Chris, > >> Icmp sgt is correct. > > while ugt would be wrong, I think sgt is too! > > For example, suppose %buf is 0 and %bufLen is ~0U.  Then %add.ptr is ~0U, and > %cmp is true, so control branches to %if.then.  However in the optimized version > %cmp is false and control branches

Patch for review. On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:45 PM Puyan Lotfi <puyan.lotfi.llvm at gmail.com> wrote: > Ping. > > Still working on preparing code for review. Will have a patch for review > ready in the coming days. > > PL > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:06 PM Puyan Lotfi <puyan.lotfi.llvm at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> >>

I'm having an interesting problem with a Cisco 7960 phone, and two Asterisk servers. I'm not sure if this problem is specific to the 7960, or even to Asterisk for that matter. Here's the scenario. I have an * server at one location with a public IP address (i.e. not behing NAT). I have a second * server and 7960 phone at another location. This one is on a private LAN, and uses NAT to

Appreciate the kindly help and advise. Regards Bilal --------------------- > > Bilal, > > I suggest you turn on logging on your tftp server to see > what files are actually being requested, and if the the tftp > server is dishing them out... Try adding a few v's to your > tftp setup: > > File: /etc/xinetd.d/tftp > Line to change: server_args = -s /tftpboot -v

Hello, This patch was reverted and the revert was forgotten to be undone after the performance regression it introduced was fixed. Can someone please revert it back (i.e. increase the max physreg size to 16K or even better to 32K) to enable us to experiment with large register number machines again? :) It was this trivial patch: Index: include/llvm/Target/TargetRegisterInfo.h

Ke, I'll be the bearer of bad news here. The radio silence this proposal has gotten probably means there is not enough interest in the community in this proposal to see it land. One concern I have with the current proposal is that the optimization value of these scopes is not clear to me. Is it only the backend which is expected to support optimizations over these scopes? Or are you