similar to: Keeping atomicity of write() through ssh

Hi all. I have an old windows VM with an oldish cygwin that I use for the regression tests. Investigating one of the test failures, I see that it's for UsePrivilegeSeparation=sandbox, and it seems to be because setrlimit(RLIMIT_FSIZE, ...) is not supported. IMO, this isn't a big loss, since the most useful thing in the rlimit "sandbox" is the descriptor limits. Can anyone see

There was some discussion in the summer on the mailing list about atomicity and synchronization primitives for LLVM. Is there any progress being made in that department? -- Pertti

Hello, I''m currently setting up some scripts that will pull in new data for Puppet master (modules, manifests, hiera data, etc.) from a Git repository. It works great! However, I''m concerned about atomicity of the whole thing. Does the Puppet master cache the modules/manifests when it starts? If so, do I need to restart the Puppet master on each update? Or can I send it a

On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, [ISO-8859-1] Pertti Kellom�ki wrote: > There was some discussion in the summer on the mailing list > about atomicity and synchronization primitives for LLVM. Is > there any progress being made in that department? Nope, not that I know of. -Chris -- http://nondot.org/sabre/ http://llvm.org/

Hi, With an rsync-2.6.4-3 client talking to an rsync-2.6.8-1.el4.rf server at least, the --ignore-times option seems not to be honoured? I.E. if I edit a file so that the mtime and size are the same, the file with the new data will not be transfered to the server. In case it's important, the full command I run is: rsync -viIaz --delete -e ssh . www.pixelbeat.org:'~/public_html'

Hi, I'm getting the following error occasional and can't find out why; 05/14/2011 09:28:51 rsyncing /dbtmp to /dbtmp.new (1st pass) .... rsync: writefd_unbuffered failed to write 4 bytes [sender]: Broken pipe (32) rsync: write failed on "/dbtmp.new/file.dmp": File too large (27) rsync error: error in file IO (code 11) at receiver.c(258) [receiver=2.6.9] rsync: connection

On 05/05/2016 10:11, Uwe Ligges wrote: > Actually this also happens under Linux and I had my R processes killed > more than once (and much worse also other processes so that we had to > reboot a server, essentially). I found that setting RLIMIT_AS [1] works very well on Linux. But this requires that you cap memory to some fixed value. > library(RAppArmor) > rlimit_as(1e9) >

Hi, I'm looking for some experience regarding using ext3 journaled, ordered or writeback modes through NFS. I wonder what is the best ext3 mode to use with NFS: journaled, ordered or writeback ? And what is provided for atomicity and ordering of write requested through a NFS client with these 3 modes ? As there is some NFS caching and segmentation policies, that are done independently of

Has anyone tried LFS (ie >2G files support) and Ext3 together? Are there good reasons why this should/should not work? I see the RH enterprise kernel patch set specifically does not attempt both lfs and ext3, but the lfs patches themselves touch some reasonably localised parts of ext2, so I would hope (without having dived in there to test), that the ext3 changes would mirror that

minios: fix and enforce block_domain atomicity To ensure that the timer event is not lost, block_domain requires that event delivery is disabled. SCHEDOP_block re-enables them, so for coherency (and fixing a bug actually), we should re-disable them after. Also, make sure that the caller disabled them. Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@eu.citrix.com> diff -r 4965e711fee8

Hi folks, I have a question regarding validates_uniqueness_of, and similar before-filter-like events attempting to guarantee some DB state prior to modification. >From my reading of ActiveRecord, validate_uniqueness_of appears to cause a SELECT on the underlying table attempting to ensure that a record with ID(s) specified in the validates_uniqueness_of statement is not already present, prior

Hi, The systrace and rlimit sandboxes have been committed and will be in snapshots dated 20110623 and later. This diff adds support for pre-auth privsep sandboxing using the OS X sandbox_init(3) service. It's a bit disappointing that the OS X developers chose such as namespace-polluting header and function names "sandbox.h", "sandbox_init()", etc. It already forced me to

On 05.05.2016 04:25, Marius Hofert wrote: > Hi Simon, > > ... all interesting (but quite a bit above my head). I only read > 'Linux' and want to throw in that this problem does not appear on > Linux (it seems). I talked about this with Martin Maechler and he > reported that the same example (on one of his machines; with NA_real_ > instead of '0's in the matrix)

On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 16:11 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > I don't think so. I would argue that it's a straight-up bug for QEMU > to expose a physically-addressed virtio-pci device to the guest behind > an emulated IOMMU. QEMU may already be doing that on ppc64, but it > isn't on x86_64 or arm (yet). Last I looked, it does on everything, it bypasses the DMA layer in

On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 16:11 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > I don't think so. I would argue that it's a straight-up bug for QEMU > to expose a physically-addressed virtio-pci device to the guest behind > an emulated IOMMU. QEMU may already be doing that on ppc64, but it > isn't on x86_64 or arm (yet). Last I looked, it does on everything, it bypasses the DMA layer in

Hi, LLVM's memory intrinsics are quite useful for performing various optimizations with frequently used memory operations. Unfortunately this intrinsics are not applicable for languages with guaranteed atomicity for their memory accesses (like Java for example). In order to overcome this limitation I'm thinking about adding set of intrinsics which will execute as a series of unordered

> > >>> - Once we add vector, should we consider adding other composite >>> types in general, including structs? C++ allows this, but has substantial >>> issues w.r.t. padding. >>> >>> I'd say possibly, but FCAs are poorly supported in the IR in general. I >>> am not willing to block changes for vectors on changes for FCAs.

I suspect the answer is no, as the very idea makes my head hurt, but a confirmation would be nice: Am I correct in assuming that it is a very bad idea to mount a physical disk on both the physical machine and on a hosted VM at the same time? I can imagine getting away with it if one were RO, but not otherwise. Any takers?

Hi, we're in the process of setting up large-page support on IBM regattas, but for large-page support the users have to have a set of extra capabilities (CAP_BYPASS_RAC_VMM,CAP_PROPAGATE). This are configured on a per user basis by listing which capability each user have in /etc/security/user. Unfortunately they don't get set when the users log in via OpenSSH (3.1p1). Does anybody know

When changing a file size with fallocate() the new size isn't being checked. In particular, the FSIZE ulimit isn't being checked, which makes fstest generic/228 fail. Simply adding a call to inode_newsize_ok() fixes this issue. Signed-off-by: Lu?s Henriques <lhenriques at suse.de> --- fs/ocfs2/file.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git