similar to: High availability strategies?

Hi, we have a medium setup (8000 pop and imap users using almost every available client, 800GB of stored mails using maildir on a Celerra NFS server, with index files on local disks, and procmail for local delivery), being served by a Dell PowerEdge 2850 (2GB RAM and dual P4 Xeon 3,2GHz). Our current not-so-high availability setup is based on a similar server with the same setup and a easy

When syncing one backup system (running dirvish, but that's not really relevant) to a second long-term backup system which uses btrfs snapshots, I get the following output: rsync: link "/parasite.oob.telegraaf.net/vservers-var-www/tree/elo/var/www/lokaalx/openx-htdocs/etc/xmlcache/.svn/prop-base/cache_etc-changes_schema-tables-core-12934.bin.svn-base" (in backup-aquagirl) =>

hello I''m using the 2.6 series 5 vservers on eth1 running on debian unstable and I wanted two of them to be used as "proxies". One of the proxies has 3 interfaces (well 4 if you count the ath0 interface whose traffic I''d like to pass through the "vproxy"); one facing the hosts''/out interface, one facing the "dmz" where two vservers

I'm running logcheck on a machine hosting a bunch of virtual machines using vserver, so I'd like to expand shell wildcards in the "logcheck.logfiles" file. So instead of entering /var/lib/vservers/v1/var/log/syslog /var/lib/vservers/v2/var/log/syslog /var/lib/vservers/v2/var/log/syslog I can enter /var/lib/vservers/*/var/log/syslog which gets expanded to the same thing as

I'm building a simple R extension around a CUDA-enabled dynamic library, and I want to run the whole package with cuda-memcheck for debugging purposes. I can run it just fine with Valgrind: $ R --no-save -d valgrind < test.R However, if I try the same thing with cuda-memcheck, $ R --no-save -d cuda-memcheck < test.R I get: *** Further command line arguments ('--no-save ')

Timo Sirainen wrote on 20.10.2016 04:01: > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.26.rc1.tar.gz > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.26.rc1.tar.gz.sig > > There are quite a lot of changes since v2.2.25. Please try out this RC so we can get a good and stable v2.2.26 out. > > * master: Removed hardcoded 511 backlog limit for listen(). The kernel > should

By default valgrind suppresses many leaks. I'm not even sure exactly how it decides which ones to suppress, but certainly global variables pointing to malloc’d data are suppressed, which is not useful behaviour. Tell valgrind to show all leaks. It won't give an error on them. However to do this we also need a much more comprehensive list of suppressions so that we don't constantly

On 10/20/2016 10:34 PM, Aki Tuomi wrote: >> On October 21, 2016 at 6:27 AM Tamsy <dovecot-list at mohtex.net> wrote: >> >> >> Timo Sirainen wrote on 20.10.2016 04:01: >>> http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.26.rc1.tar.gz >>> http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.26.rc1.tar.gz.sig >>> >>> There are quite a lot of

Thanks for the feedback. Sounds like that at this point in time we can’t really settle on a single strategy. We probably want to support all of these uses-cases: 1. A common early loop-versioning pass, probably fairly conservative initially (e.g. if you need a single memcheck to remove all may-aliasing from a hight-trip-count loop it’s probably a good idea to version). Even if the pass would

being from a telecoms background, the thought of a single asterisk box solution (even in a low production environment of say <10 phones) worries me slightly! starting from say a base of asterisk@home, you would have several MySQL databases, in addition to numerous config files. I have looked at high availiblity solutions, and from a hardware monitoring point of view, its relitivly straight

I've just sent a code review request to llvm-commits. --kcc On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > Hello llvmdev, > > I would like to propose and discuss yet another dynamic tool, which we > call MemorySanitizer (msan). > The main goal of the tool is to detect uses of uninitialized memory (the > major feature of

Hi again, MemorySanitizer (msan) is now mature enough to bootstrap LLVM and run it w/o any additional tools. Msan has already found one bug in LLVM itself: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=13929 Would anyone be willing to do a codereview (it was sent to llvm-commits: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.llvm.cvs/123253) Thanks, --kcc On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Kostya

> On October 21, 2016 at 6:27 AM Tamsy <dovecot-list at mohtex.net> wrote: > > > Timo Sirainen wrote on 20.10.2016 04:01: > > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.26.rc1.tar.gz > > http://dovecot.org/releases/2.2/rc/dovecot-2.2.26.rc1.tar.gz.sig > > > > There are quite a lot of changes since v2.2.25. Please try out this RC so we can get a good

Hello llvmdev, I would like to propose and discuss yet another dynamic tool, which we call MemorySanitizer (msan). The main goal of the tool is to detect uses of uninitialized memory (the major feature of Valgrind/Memcheck not covered by AddressSanitizer). It will also find use-after-destruction-but-before-free in C++. The algorithm of the tool is similar to that of Memcheck (

Hi i tried to use rsync to backup my remote server.I want to exclude folder like /var /proc ... .I use --exlude-from=/etc/rsync/excludes the file looks like this: - */var/* - */proc/* etc. My problem is that i run vservers on this machine and i don't want that the folder like /proc in this vservers are backuped how can i exclude all paths wich contain such foldernames? Please help me

I'm building a two node cluster to run vserver systems on. I've setup glusterfs with this config: # node a volume data-posix type storage/posix option directory /export/cluster end-volume volume data1 type features/posix-locks subvolumes data-posix end-volume volume data2 type protocol/client option transport-type tcp/client option remote-host

I had to add several suppressions because Python leaks memory by design, and also increase the max depth of valgrind stack traces because Python stack traces are very deep. Note that to do proper valgrinding of Python itself we would need to specially recompile Python: https://svn.python.org/projects/python/trunk/Misc/README.valgrind --- tests/test-lang-plugins.c | 3 +-

I'm running dahdi on the host system, and have added the /dev/dahdi/ devices to the guest vserver as recommended in Beave's "Virtual Private Asterisk" whitepaper (http://www.telephreak.org/papers/vpa/). I tried copying libtonezone.so and libtonezone.h to the guest, but I couldn't anything to replace zaptel.h in DAHDI souce (it seems dahdi.h was deprecated?). I need to

It’s a good thought in general Adam, but I worried about following scenarios: 1) As Dibyendu already mentioned Check1 + Check2 is not very clear. If your intent is superset/union of check1 & check2 then I’m not sure it will always help passes those needs smaller checks (i.e. loop distribution) Every pass has a different need of runtime check, i.e. vectorizer checks each memory against all

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de > wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:39:34PM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > > Another difference from Memcheck is that we propose to use 8 shadow bits > > per byte of application memory and use a > > direct shadow mapping (for 64-bit linux that is just clearing 46-th bit > of >