similar to: I see "everyone permission" at windows security even i didn't add.

Hi Renato, I've investigated a few of these for AArch64 recently, and some of the results will be applicable in the 32-bit world too. > MultiSource/Benchmarks/McCat/12-IOtest/iotest.execution_time This is because of disagreement between ABIs over whether "char" is signed. ARM says no, x86 says yes. >

Hi Folks, Looks like our LNT ARM buildbot with the vectorizer is running and producing good results. There are only 11 failures: FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/Burg/burg.execution_time (1 of 1104) FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/ClamAV/clamscan.execution_time (2 of 1104) FAIL: MultiSource/Applications/lemon/lemon.execution_time (3 of 1104) FAIL:

Dear gluster experts, We have encountered a severe performance issue related to quota feature of gluster. My underlying fs is lvm with xfs format. The problem is if quota is enabled the io performance is about 26MB/s but with quota disabled the io performance is 216MB/s. Any one known what's the problem? BTW I have reproduce it several times and it is related to quota indeed. Here's the

I went to the site to subscribe again and ended up watching some of Jeremy's Google interviews. I particularly enjoyed the interview with James and the bow tie lesson at the end. :) So anyway, I recently upgraded my home network to end-to-end GbE. My clients are Windows XP SP3 w/hot fixes, and my Samba server is 3.5.6 atop vanilla kernel.org Linux 3.2.6 and Debian 6.0.6. With FDX fast

Knut Krüger via samba wrote: >> Limiting the linux-server's max cpu-speed had >> the most affect on performance: >> (limited to 1.6GHz instead of 2.4GHz) (33% limitation) >> > The server is equipped with an 6 core / 12 tread 3.6 GHz CPU (Intel Core > i7-980x and a Raid 10 Disk array. > The cpu is 90% idle (including webserver traffic and mailserver

> Limiting the linux-server's max cpu-speed had > the most affect on performance: > (limited to 1.6GHz instead of 2.4GHz) (33% limitation) The server is equipped with an 6 core / 12 tread 3.6 GHz CPU (Intel Core i7-980x   and  a Raid 10 Disk array. The cpu is 90% idle (including webserver traffic and mailserver traffic) during downloads. There is no encryption because the samba VM

I have two identical servers. The only difference is that the first one has Maxtor 250G drives and the second one has Seagate 320G drives. OS: CentOS-4.4 (fully patched) CPU: dual Opteron 280 Memory: 16GB Raid card: 3ware 9550Sx-8LP Raid volume: 4-disk Raid 5 with NCQ and Write Cache enabled On the first server I have decent performance. Nothing spectacular, but good enough. The second one

I have two identical servers. The only difference is that the first one has Maxtor 250G drives and the second one has Seagate 320G drives. OS: CentOS-4.4 (fully patched) CPU: dual Opteron 280 Memory: 16GB Raid card: 3ware 9550Sx-8LP Raid volume: 4-disk Raid 5 with NCQ and Write Cache enabled On the first server I have decent performance. Nothing spectacular, but good enough. The second one

Hi Renato, I noticed the bot yesterday. Thanks for working on this! On Feb 19, 2013, at 7:45 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > Looks like our LNT ARM buildbot with the vectorizer is running and producing good results. Do you have a base run with vectorization turned off? So we could see where we are degrading things? When you say good

Hi, just pushed to testing a new build of qemu-kvm-ev, here's the ChangeLog: * Thu Apr 20 2017 Sandro Bonazzola <sbonazzo at redhat.com> - ev-2.6.0-28.el7_3.9.1 - Removing RH branding from package name * Fri Mar 24 2017 Miroslav Rezanina <mrezanin at redhat.com> - rhev-2.6.0-28.el7_3.9 - kvm-block-gluster-memory-usage-use-one-glfs-instance-per.patch [bz#1413044] -

Knut Krüger via samba wrote: > What is the maximum speed for download from a samba share? > > I have a 100 kbit/s Internet > > The maximum speed for a download from my webserver with samba is about > 25.000 kbit/s > > The bottleneck is the samba access. Without samba I can download with > 100 kbit/s > > So the question? is it possible to get more speed or is

What is the maximum speed for download from a samba share? I have a 100 kbit/s Internet The maximum speed for a download from my  webserver with samba is about 25.000 kbit/s The bottleneck is the samba access.  Without samba  I can download with 100 kbit/s So the question? is it possible to get more speed or is this the maximum speed with samba? I tried a lot of hints for samba tuning but

Hello; I was able to build and install llvm(3.0) under Ubuntu 11.10 (using the ./configure script found under llvm source, and then make and make install). While configuring, I gave --prefix as a directory where I would like llvm to be installed. I did not give --with-llvmgccdir and the --enable-optimized argument to configure. Because 3.0 doesn't come with llvmgcc source/binaries and I

Are these 225 compile time regressions real? It sure looks bad! Ciao, Duncan. On 01/12/11 09:39, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386 nightly tester results > > URL http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/simple/nts/380/ > Nickname bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386:4 > Name curlew.apple.com > > Run ID Order Start Time End Time > Current 380

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10322 Summary: Slow Performance over Network rsync Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: Joerg.Grube at Gmx.De

Hi, Sean: I'm sorry I lie. I didn't mean to lie. I did try to avoid making a *BIG* change to the IPO pass-ordering for now. However, when I make a minor change to populateLTOPassManager() by separating module-pass and non-module-passes, I saw quite a few performance difference, most of them are degradations. Attacking these degradations one by one in a piecemeal manner is wasting

G'Day Tanya, Is it too late to bring in the following patches to fix some major brokenness in the AuroraUX tool chain for 2.6? http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Tools.cpp?r1=84468&r2=84469&view=diff&pathrev=84469 http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/Tools.cpp?r1=84265&r2=84266&view=diff&pathrev=84266

Target: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE on i386 autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: i386-unknown-freebsd6.2 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release build. llvm-gcc 4.2 from source.

As counter example. My slowest server, AMD E350 2 core, max 1.6Gz. On 1Gb lan, disk 2x 5400rpm software raid 1 + 1 ssd. Copy Speed 115Mb/s as in max 1Gb bandwith, from a win7 and win10 pc to the raid1. File sizes. 100Mb+ get max 115Mb/s to a 4MB blocksized partition. 1-10mb files ,max 90-115Mb/s to a 1MB blocksized partition. 0.0-1mb files ,max 60-100Mb/s to a 4k blocksized partition.

Hi, LLVM 2.1-pre1 test results: Linux (SUSE) on x86 (P4) Release mode, but with assertions enabled LLVM srcdir == objdir # of expected passes 2250 # of expected failures 5 I ran the llvm-test suite on my desktop while I was also working on that PC, so don't put too much trust in the timing info. Especially during the "spiff" test the machine was swapping