similar to: 'Asterisk is not thread safe' message

I''ve noticed that after I create 83 domains on a server, ''xm create'' will create domains without a valid console tty value. This corresponds approx. to 256 file descriptors. I''ve bumped up the limits for all daemon processes to 1500 file descriptors, so I''m really puzzled where xen is hitting a resource limit. Where is the code that creates the xs

I''ve noticed that after I create 83 domains on a server, ''xm create'' will create domains without a valid console tty value. This corresponds approx. to 256 file descriptors. I''ve bumped up the limits for all daemon processes to 1500 file descriptors, so I''m really puzzled where xen is hitting a resource limit. Where is the code that creates the xs

I was reading here and there about the differences between Merb and Rails [1] and became curious about statements such as this: > It is threadsafe with configurable Mutex Locks (Routing is also > threadsafe) Having mucked with the routes system, I had this awful feeling that I don''t understand threading well enough to know if my contribution is "thread safe".

Trying to add bootstrap to an app being ported to Rails 3.2.3. I get the following error: Error compiling asset application.css: Sass::SyntaxError: File to import not found or unreadable: bootstrap. Here''s my gem file: source ''http://rubygems.org'' gem ''rails'', ''3.2.9'' group :assets do gem ''sass-rails'',

I've been searching here and at the ubuntu forums and can't seem to find a solution, I think it's pretty simple though. I've checked for libc6 and libc6-dev and they both appear to be installed, IIRC they fixed a previous ./configure issue I had with some other source. mason at mason-desktop:~/Desktop/wine-1.0-rc1$ ./configure checking build system type...

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Peter Zion <peter.zion at fabric-engine.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to modify my LLVM-based compiler to perform an initial, no-optimization compilation synchronously on startup and then perform an asynchronous, optimized recompilation in the background, and I am getting in one of the optimization passes. > > - I am using the official

Hello, I am trying to modify my LLVM-based compiler to perform an initial, no-optimization compilation synchronously on startup and then perform an asynchronous, optimized recompilation in the background, and I am getting in one of the optimization passes. - I am using the official release of LLVM 2.8 - I have compiled LLVM with threading enabled; I am running llvm::llvm_start_multithreaded() on

Ok, sorry for the response on the same thread. This is a new one. The main thing is that with this I set the Store Procedure or Query directly on the dialplan line, is easier to configure, change, manage, etc. I also know that works great with heavy load, and it reconnects when the network goes down and up. Can you help me porting this app? I think woun`t be difficult for someone that

Hello all, I was just wondering if anybody knew whether mechanize is supposed to be thread-safe or not? I didn''t really find any information about it anywhere. I''ve been getting a strange error in protocol.rb when I run a script that uses mechanize in a multi threaded fashion, but not with a single thread. I''m trying to write a spider that does multiple gets in

Hi All, I'm stumped on this and I looking for some clues to fix this. This is a new install of Slackware 12.1 onto an IBM x330 Server. Asterisk 1.4.20.1 plays the wav files and the Cepstral_Allison Swift just fine, but when I play the gsm files the audio quite choppy. And, the files produced from the MixMonitor don't even record any audio other than noise. I have a hard drive from

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I finally got around to testing this approach (round tripping through bitcode in memory) and it works beautifully - and isn't that much slower than cloning. I have noticed however that the copy process isn't thread-safe. The problem is that in Function, there is lazy initialization code for arguments: void CheckLazyArguments() const { if

It is my understanding that the implementation for jump-threading in LLVM is not presently able to effectively optimize code containing a state-machine implemented using a loop + switch. This is the case, for example, with the Coremark benchmark function core_state_transition(). Bug 42313 was filed to address this in 2019: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42313 It appears that GCC

How does threading work in lli, particularly in interpreted (non-JIT) mode? I've tried to find direct references in the code and couldn't, so am I right in assuming that it's expected that any underlying OS's threading will be used? If so, how does this work with respect to (I assume) needing to maintain explicitly separate execution context stacks for each thread? Thanks,

+chandlerc, aaronballman, in case there are additional carryovers and/or issues from the review thread which I've left out. I have a patch up for review[1, 2] that attempts to replace LLVM's mutex implementation with std::mutex and std::recursive_mutex. While the patch seems to work, there are questions surrounding whether or not the approach used is correct. I'll try to summarize

You could probably round trip it through bitcode in memory. I think all of the IR cloning functionality assumes that only one context is being used. Even if the serialization isn't efficient as a clone could be, it should give you very high confidence that everything Just Works. :) On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Clinton <andrew at sidefx.com> wrote: > I have a

Hi All... I have a maddening problem... I have Asterisk configured to pick up a line after 4 rings. I do this to allow my fax machine to pick up a particular distinctive ring pattern, so I don't have to pay for a dedicated fax line. If someone calls the line, lets it ring 3 times and then hangs up, Asterisk answers the line, and holds it off hook forever, constantly playing the

I have a Module/LLVMContext that I'd like to clone and manipulate in different threads (each thread may perform different translation / optimization, so they need unique copies). Currently this process has to be locked, since each clone of the Module still refers to the same LLVMContext. Is there a way to clone both the Module and LLVMContext so that the copies can be manipulated

On May 12, 2014, at 3:52 PM, Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com> wrote: > I don't have a strong opinion on this topic at the moment, but given that it is potentially GC related, I figured I'd speak up. > > I see two unspoken assumptions in the thread so far: > - The runtime needs a means to bring all threads to a stop to perform some action. In particular,

Hello everyone, I have just put in production dovecot imap and pop3 in replacement of courier in a setup of 700 accounts aprox. Dovecot release running is 1.2.16 in a Linux CentOS 5.8. Seems like some accounts are having problems dealing with message threading, as I read lines like this one in my logs: IMAP(some_user): Error: Threading lost Message ID ...and some of those accounts cannot

QUERY: THREAD REFERENCES ISO-8859-1 ALL RESPONSE: [SERVERBUG] Internal error occurred. Refer to server log for more information. [2013-08-09 15:42:34] Aug 9 15:41:48 postamt dovecot: imap(username) tTbs7oPjfACNKs4m: Error: Threading lost Message ID Aug 9 15:42:34 postamt dovecot: imap(username) tTbs7oPjfACNKs4m: Error: Threading lost Message ID What does that mean? WHY has the Message-Id