[SCore-users] (no subject)

[neural_shock at e-mail.ru]

>From: neural_shock at e-mail.ru
>Subject: Re: [SCore-users] (no subject)
>Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 12:34:01 +0400
>Message-ID: <3d44fdf9.1a32.0 at e-mail.ru>
>
>neural_shock> >Hi.
>neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >From: neural_shock at e-mail.ru
>neural_shock> >Subject: Re: [SCore-users] (no subject)
>neural_shock> >Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 11:56:20 +0400
>neural_shock> >Message-ID: <3d44f524.5f33.0 at e-mail.ru>
>neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Hi.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Sorry for late response.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >From: neural_shock at e-mail.ru
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Subject: [SCore-users] (no subject)
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 11:18:39 +0400
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Message-ID: <3d3e54cf.7f1.0 at e-mail.ru>
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >neural_shock> hello.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >neural_shock> 
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >neural_shock> here are some logs of checpointing
failure in
>neural_shock> english. see messages
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> on Jul 24
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >neural_shock> in "messages" file in attached
tar ball. there
>neural_shock> are also "gdbout2"
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> file, there
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >neural_shock> are some debug information from
kgdb. 
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >neural_shock> 
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >neural_shock> with respect, mike.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Could you give us more information.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >1) Is the program (LU class A) working fine without
check pointing?
>neural_shock> 
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >2)  How about class W of LU.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Shinji.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >-----
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> >Shinji Sumimoto
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> hello.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> 
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> 1. yes it works fine.
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> 2. i did not run lu class w. there are too few
memory on my test
>neural_shock> machines even
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> for class b of this programm ( as far as i think.
SCore's FEP
>neural_shock> does not print
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> "memory could be exhausted" but nodes begins swap
pages too heavy
>neural_shock> when i run
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> lu.B.2 ).
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> 
>neural_shock> >neural_shock> with respect, mike. 
>neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >Are these true?
>neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >Class W is smaller than Class A.
>neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> >Class S < W < A < B
>neural_shock> >
>neural_shock> 
>neural_shock> $BUE(Bs. you are right i was wrong. and i have tested it already. results are the
>neural_shock> same.
>
>So, how about class S?
>
>Shinji.
>------
>Shinji Sumimoto, Fujitsu Labs

S is too small. there are no rpoblems. but as i think it is simply because checkpointing is already done when system shuts down scored.

mike.
http://www.e-mail.ru

---

---
http://www.E-mail.ru  - ���������� ���������� �������� ������.
����� 100 ��/�, SMTP/POP3, SMS, ������������, ������ �� ����� � �������, �������������, ��������, ��������, ����� � ������ ������.