On Sat, Feb 03, 2024 at 11:12:39AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> On 2024/01/31 5:20, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > Except that github choked on the 366MB coe.out file. The gzip command
> > compresses it to 72MB, and "tar -cJf" gets it down to 33MB, so maybe I
> > rebase the compressed version into the commit that created that file.
>
> Quote from github's file size limit at:
>
> https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/working-with-files/managing-large-files/about-large-files-on-github#file-size-limits
>
> GitHub limits the size of files allowed in repositories. If you
> attempt to add or update a file that is larger than 50 MiB, you
> will receive a warning from Git. The changes will still
> successfully push to your repository, but you can consider removing
> the commit to minimize performance impact. For more information,
> see "Removing files from a repository's history."
>
> ...
>
> GitHub blocks files larger than 100 MiB.
>
> You hit the github's limit.
>
> >
> > And change the script that collects the data to do the compression. ;-)
> >
> > Now kernel.org had no problem with the full file, but it might also
> > be good to avoid imposing too much on their storage-space largesse...
> >
> > Other thoughts?
>
> Well, no. Using xz compression looks reasonable to me.
I will need to figure something else out if I ever get access to a system
with (say) 500 CPUs. If nothing else, split it into one compressed file
per CPU. I am sure that github will love that. ;-)
> By the way, you added the following in the answer to QQA 15.31:
>
> Alert readers may have noticed that the distribution shown in
> Figure E.10 is monomodal, which those in Figure E.12 and
> Figure E.14 are trimodal.
>
> In coe.png, whose bin_width is 2 I think, I see a spike around
> time period = [38, 40]. Count of time period 40 is 140 and the
> largest count in coe.dat.
>
> Attached coe.png is the histogram version of the same plot.
> The spike is more evident there.
>
> This spike causes slight but significant enough bump in the
> right shoulder of Figure E.10 whose bin_width is 40.
> You can still say the distribution is monomodal, but I just
> wanted to make sure.
>
> Or I can replace the EPS plot with the one with bin_width=2,
> if you prefer.
Thank you for checking, and please do replace that plot. I will
then reword that text to say something like "almost monomodal" and
"emphatically trimodal".
Thanx, Paul
