similar to: problem witht working director

Hi, I am creating some routing policy and I am having a basic problem with ip. I am starting with 2 hosts to test the configuration. ---------- ---------- | host A |------------| Host B | ---------- ---------- IP: 10.0.100.1 IP: 10.0.100.2 On hostA: # ip address add 10.0.100.1/24 dev eth0 brd + On hostB: # ip address add 10.0.100.2/24 dev eth0 brd +

"Error in predict.coxph(f.ph.eha, newdata = mort, type = "lp") : Data is not the same size as it was in the original fit" This error message was added in a recent update to predict.coxph. If it needs to reconstruct some aspects from the original fit, such as the X matrix or strata vector, it makes sure that the data set is the same size. It was to stop fit <-

Hi everyone, this article (http://blog.dovecot.org/2012/02/dovecot-clustering-with-dsync-based.html) describes the situation for director/NFS-based clusters and SSH-based clusters. Right now I'm running the first setup with one proxy/director and two backends (all 2.2.x) mounting an NFS-share but I'd like to get rid of NFS (it's slow) and, if one backend is down, the proxy still

Hi Tom, It works fine without modify a lot the config. Just have add a virtual adress 10.0.100.2 in loc and a dnat between 10.0.100.2 and 10.1.100.2. Shorewall is very very powerfull. Super Thank''s again Franck

Hello I have a problem with lmtp delivery to usernames with '-' char. Everythong after - is ignored. when delivering to test-test2 the error message is. User doesn't exist: test I suspect this is a sideefect of auth_username_format = %Lu I have tried %Ln without success. Imap works without problems for those users. How can I disable this mapping for lmtp and use verbatim

Hi, Since I had upgraded from Samba 3.0.0 to 3.0.4 I have problems with ArcServe to connect to the share. Arcserve is running on a NT 4.0 box, everytime I try to connect to the samba share it says me "authenticacion failed". When I browse the share from windows explorer I have not problems. Thank you in advance Guillermo

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:41 PM Eli Friedman <efriedma at quicinc.com> wrote: > This seems like a very complicated approach… do you have some numbers to > give some idea how much of an improvement we’re talking about here over a > more conventional solution involving shared libraries? Or have you not > gotten that far? > I can talk to my internal customer to see what kind