similar to: Small footprint Rails server

Hey all, I have a potential project which calls for a very small form-factor computer like this: http://www.marvell.com/products/embedded_processors/developer/kirkwood/sheevaplug.jsp However, I am needing an FXS port integrated into a small footprint computer. Nothing larger than a WiFi router or gateway device, but the smaller the better, and able to run Asterisk with at least a spare USB port

In the test environment, logging out and back in is not working for me. The log for the first login looks like this: Processing UserSessionsController#create (for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-05-24 19:53:57) [POST] Parameters: {"user_session"=>{"remember_me"=>"true", "password"=>"[FILTERED]", "login"=>"test"},

Hi, I'm planning to create a new tool to simplify creation and management of kickstart-files (as well as automate some of the tasks that come with automated installation). If you know of another mailinglist that fits this subject, or you know of similar projects (because I can imagine there are countless implementations inside companies) please let me know. I'm just in the design

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007, Benjamin Smedberg wrote: > What is the expected footprint of a tool using the LLVM JIT? Right now it's ~1.5 to 2M for one platform, at least on darwin. > I have created a simple project that uses the LLVM C++ API to JIT calls > to XPCOM method signature... it works well, but the component DLL is > very large (Linux x86-74, 5.8MB optimized and stripped). Is

Hi Everybody, my rails 1.2.5 application runs in a linux embedded environment with serious memory constraints. I would need to know how small a memory footprint I can hope to get. I run ligthtpd with only one dispatch and I did already remove actionmailer and actionwebservice which I do not need. Currently top shows a memory footprint of 720K for lighttpd and 25M for the dispatch.fcgi process. The

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 What is the expected footprint of a tool using the LLVM JIT? I have created a simple project that uses the LLVM C++ API to JIT calls to XPCOM method signature... it works well, but the component DLL is very large (Linux x86-74, 5.8MB optimized and stripped). Is this normal? Am I linking to "too much" or not using the correct link flags?

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sebastian Dreßler" <dressler at zib.de> > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2013 7:49:39 AM > Subject: [LLVMdev] Passes for object memory footprint / data-direction > > Hi, > > In the past months we were working on two LLVM passes which use data > objects of functions as input. One pass

Hello This is my first mail for this list, so please be considerately. I'm trying to build a tiny version of samba for an embedded device. currently im using the version 2.2 with a footprint of smbd 2.4M. Thats to much. Is there a way/patch to build smbd without everything beside file exchage? I don't need printer, swat, ldap,.... support. Just exchange. I have disabled most of the

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Chris Lattner wrote: > Finally, there is still a lot that can be done to reduce code size. For > example, building a JIT links in the .s file printers in, and they have > non-trivial size (big string tables etc). It would be great to refactor > the code to avoid things like this. I wouldn't be surprised if we could > shrink the

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:02 PM, reed kotler <rkotler at mips.com> wrote: > We have a large bitcode file produced from a tool. It's about 23 meg. > > When we compile this with llc, the footprint is 4-7 gig depending on > which target. > > On a desktop this is not such a problem but it is on mobile devices. > > The suspect is that the flow graph for the entire

We have a large bitcode file produced from a tool. It's about 23 meg. When we compile this with llc, the footprint is 4-7 gig depending on which target. On a desktop this is not such a problem but it is on mobile devices. The suspect is that the flow graph for the entire program is built and kept for the duration, even if no optimization needing it all is in progress. This would make us

Dear List: Can anyone tell me the resource footprint of a minimal Xen VM? In other words, how much CPU, memory, disk resources are required to run 1 VM with, for example, a simple 1.68 MB LEAF distro? I''m preparing to create a virtual network to test various LEAF routers and I''m trying to decide whether to use UML or Xen. VMware, which I already have, is out of the question

Ok. Thanks. I will put some instrumentation into LLVM to help with memory usage tracking and take a look at llvm-extract. Reed On 11/03/2011 04:25 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:02 PM, reed kotler<rkotler at mips.com> wrote: >> We have a large bitcode file produced from a tool. It's about 23 meg. >> >> When we compile this with llc, the

If you look at the definition of %in%, you'll find that it is implemented using match, so if we did as you suggest, I give it about three days before someone suggests to inline the function call... Readability of source code is not usually our prime concern. The && idea does have some merit, though. Apropos, why is there no setcontains()? -pd > On 06 Jan 2015, at 22:02 , Herv?

The ratio of object size to rds file size depends on the object. Some variation is due to how header information is stored in memory and in the file but I suspect most is due to how compression works (e.g., a vector of repeated values can be compressed into a smaller file than a bunch of random bytes). f <- function (data, ...) { force(data) tf <- tempfile()

Hi Sebastian, On 18/02/13 19:02, Sebastian Dreßler wrote: > Hal, > > On 02/18/2013 06:33 PM, Hal Finkel wrote: > [...] > >>> In the past months we were working on two LLVM passes which use >>> data objects of functions as input. One pass computes the >>> "data-direction" (FORTRAN users know this as intent) of the >>> object, i.e.

Hello to everyone on the list, This is my first message sent to the list so bare with me on this one :) I've started learning C++ of September of last year in school. I think I'm fairly competent(I Hope :) at it and we were recently discussing bloatware in class. Vorbis seems so large and complex that I offen get intimidated, so I was wondering if anyone else would like to

I guess I miss-interpreted the text in [2]. It talks about the optimizations are hindered if the compiler driver invokes link time optimizer "separately". I found that all files compiled are in bc format. Also in library archives, the embedded files were in bitcode format. So the gold linker and LLVMgold plugin are indeed working fine. However, there is still question over only 6% gain

I was thinking something like: setequal <- function(x,y) { xu = unique(x) yu = unique(y) if (length(xu) != length(yu)) { return FALSE; } return (all( match( xu, yu, 0L ) > 0L ) ) } This lets you fail early for cheap (skipping the allocation from the ">0L"s). Whether or not this goes fast depends a lot on the uniqueness of x and y and whether or not you want to optimize for

I have a website up and running on TextDrive with Rails/lighttpd/fcgi. Unfortunately, as my account is a "shared server" account on TxD, they kill processes that are hogging resources (quite understandably). Unfortunately for me, my Ruby fcgi processes load up rather ... large (just under 50mb). It doesn''t take much to push it to 50mb, at which point it gets killed. Does