+1
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 14:27 +, iga...@apache.org wrote:
> Updated Branches:
> refs/heads/3.2.x 3f5c75ded -> 15dea758d
>
>
> voted. You should too.
>
>
> Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/trafficserver/repo
> Commit: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/trafficserver/com
It seems ok to me. why not put it in the TS-1339, so that we all can
reviews and test it.
On Mon, 2012-08-20 at 11:31 -0500, Alan M. Carroll wrote:
> As we're on the subject of supporting range requests, I have a substantive
> patch at
>
> https://github.com/SolidWallOfCode/trafficserver/tree/ra
sorry, the URL:
http://people.apache.org/~weijin/ats_performance.png
On Sat, 2012-04-28 at 09:17 -0700, John Plevyak wrote:
> I didn't get an attachment. Did anyone else?
>
> john
>
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:07 AM, taorui wrote:
>
> > the attachment is the re
.camel@taorui-ThinkPad-X201]
This email (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally
privileged. If you received this email in error, please delete it immediately
and do not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any
other
the attachment is the results for the mail server not support image.
On Sat, 2012-04-28 at 02:02 +0800, taorui wrote:
> Hi, guys, We (taobao.com) did some analysis (include the hotpot and
> concurrency）by using the intel vtune_amplifier_xe with the help of an
> intel engineer. Here
Hi, guys, We (taobao.com) did some analysis (include the hotpot and
concurrency）by using the intel vtune_amplifier_xe with the help of an
intel engineer. Here comes the results. It seems that the
copy_user_generic_string and ink_freelist operation is the hotpot.
+1 from me.
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 08:28 -0700, James Peach wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2012, at 7:36 AM, Leif Hedstrom wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > James suggested a while ago that we change how we deal with backported
> > bugs. I agree with him that our system of closing, reopening, reassigning
> > e
hmmm, no better way, I sucks.
On Sat, 2012-04-21 at 14:39 +, Igor Galić wrote:
> What better way is there to welcome a new committer than a
> failing build ;)
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > Updated Branches:
> > refs/heads/master 11c11c8e6 -> f4acef88e
> >
> >
> > fix a wrong CAS
Thanks John and AMC, especially for AMC, he contribute a lot to solve
this problem. Thanks again.
I remember the commit had already reverted and I said the rescheduling
patch have problems in irc.
On Wed, 2012-03-14 at 13:44 -0500, Alan M. Carroll wrote:
> One thing that should be noted is that, regardless of whether this patch is a
> permanent fix, I think it is clearly superior to the curr
On Wed, 2012-03-14 at 10:22 -0500, Alan M. Carroll wrote:
> Tuesday, March 13, 2012, 11:46:15 PM, you wrote:
>
> > Here are my comments for what they are worth.
>
> > First, let me detail the issue this is trying to address.
>
> > The way that most clients work with VCs is via and Processor::ope
I have not read this patch carefully so I have no idea that the patch
solved the problem or not. I just have two question:
1) do we find the cause of the crash? (how to trigger the crash, in what
situation)
2) is it worth using smart pointer to prevent the crash? (maintain the
design principle of
12 matches
Mail list logo
