Sorry, but I disagree, at least in the context of Go, and the difference
between errors and panics. Imagine any financial service, if the code is
encountering a condition it deems should be impossible, yet is occurring, bad
things will happen. Very old adage, garbage in = garbage out.
> On
Recovering from panics is a common and IMO perfectly acceptable practice...
For example in a web server where you do not want a panic that occurs while
handling a request to affect other request, especially ones that are in
flight.
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:47 PM Robert Engels wrote:
> The way
27605 is more about providing the values that caused the panic, not the
source location. It is still the case that even with 27605 multiple
indexing operations on the same line are not distinguished (unless
knowledge of the application lets you disambiguate using the values).
For nil pointer
It's not pretty, but if you absolutely must write this code and can't refactor
it, you can always use a closure to scope the defer:
lock1.Lock()
err = func() error {
defer lock1.Unlock()
return performOperation1()
}()
if err != nil {
return err
}
performExpensiveOperation2()
On Fri, Feb
What's suboptimal with the first one (or the second one) is that if
performOperation1() panics the lock will not be released. It may or may not
be a problem depending on the situation. Your assessment of defer used with
locks is correct - it works well only if the lock doesn't need to be
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:12:36PM +0100, Valentin Vidic wrote:
> Yes, it is quite strange. I don't see it hitting any limits but
> the request rate goes down.
Seems it could be GC related since turning off GC gives 5x request
rate with 20 gorutines:
$ ./gb -duration 15s -parallel 5 http://nginx
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 02:30:52PM -0600, robert engels wrote:
> Could be many things, but a few to think about:
Yes, it is quite strange. I don't see it hitting any limits but
the request rate goes down.
> If you run more Go routines than you have CPUs available, and the task
> is CPU bound
Could be many things, but a few to think about:
If you run more Go routines than you have CPUs available, and the task is CPU
bound (which may be if the url points to a local resource), then you are going
to thrash, causing worse performance.
The service you are calling is not properly
Hi,
Can someone help me figure out why the performance (request rate)
of this program goes down when I add more gorutines?
$ ./gb -duration 15s -parallel 5 http://nginx
Running 5 parallel clients for 15s...
Requests: 217998
Rate: 14533.2/s
Bytes: 133414776
Code[200]: 217998
$ ./gb -duration 15s
just for future reference, there is no format for 'this' (the format op
asked for). because this format does not have a period. i was just as
surprised. you can try yourself: https://play.golang.org/p/wv_PDwTmEOk
the documentation also states that you do not specify the fraction
seconds for
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 11:28 AM vincent163 wrote:
>
> I am thinking about how to write programs like this:
> lock1.Lock()
> err = performOperation1()
> if err != nil {
> lock1.Unlock()
> return err
> }
> lock1.Unlock()
> performExpensiveOperation2()
How about this:
lock1.Lock()
err =
Le 08/02/2019 à 01:10, Burak Serdar a écrit :
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 2:28 PM Rajanikanth Jammalamadaka
wrote:
How can I parse the following timestamp in Go?
date +%y%m%d%H%M%S%N
190207202017034235995
for the ymdHMS part, you can use:
time.Parse("060102150405",str[:12])
I don't know if
I am thinking about how to write programs like this:
lock1.Lock()
err = performOperation1()
if err != nil {
lock1.Unlock()
return err
}
lock1.Unlock()
performExpensiveOperation2()
The lock1 must be locked while performing operation1, and I need to use its
result to perform operation2. Since
Much appreciated :)
On 2/8/19, Karel Minařík wrote:
> It is definitely on the priorities list. The API itself is generated, so
> it's a matter of adjusting potential edge cases, and a bit of
> administration around branches/tags.
>
> Karel
>
> --
> You received this message because you are
It is definitely on the priorities list. The API itself is generated, so
it's a matter of adjusting potential edge cases, and a bit of
administration around branches/tags.
Karel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe
clustering:
https://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs3110/2014fa/lectures/13/lec13.html
careful hash functions often treat short inputs specially.
iterated shift-xor alone is weak in expanding the "changed bits(s)" signal,
at least by comparison to a) large prime multiply, b) good s-boxes, c)
To add to what Keith has said, Callback has been renamed to Func because
the function will get called synchronously instead of being async. This is
one of the major changes in 1.12.
On Thursday, 7 February 2019 05:11:50 UTC+5:30, Keith Randall wrote:
>
> To answer the OP, wasm support is in
Great stuff !
> The client targets Elasticsearch 7.x. Support for 6.x and 5.x APIs will
be added later.
Would appreciate if this is prioritized. Our ES setup use 5.x version. We
would be unable to use this client if it does not support 5.x.
On Friday, 8 February 2019 16:03:37 UTC+5:30, Karel
Hello
i was playing with the plugin mode and i met this error
*panic: interface conversion: interface {} is func(string, func([]string)
error) error, not func(string, func([]string) error) error (types from
different scopes)*
the code is a regular conversion, without test because i was not
Hi all,
a new official Go client for Elasticsearch has been published to Github
today:
—> https://github.com/elastic/go-elasticsearch
The client has been in the works for couple of months, and completely
replaces the old "WIP" client in the repository.
The project comes with extensive
Volker / Jan / Tamás & Peter -- thank you all for your replies.
On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 13:16, peterGo wrote:
> Jamie,
>
> This is a question about Unicode:
>
> The Unicode Consortium: http://unicode.org/
>
> The Unicode Standard: http://www.unicode.org/standard/standard.html
>
> Unicode
8 Şub 2019 Cum 11:57 tarihinde Michael Jones şunu
yazdı:
> ...says that in one particular test condition (8 character strings, 1M
> random strings, all possible shift values)
> and under one particular metric of virtue...
>
> x = x<<15 ^ x>>33
>
> ...gives the closest overall approximation to a
one quick result:
celeste:spin10 mtj$ spin10 -a 0,63 -b 0,63 -bins 32 -rotate ab -set 0,0,0,0
-samples 10 -trials 10
[0] best 5.683527373827505613e+01 8 0 0 0
[1] best 5.508690460484671547e+01 8 1 0 0
[2] best 5.434519430630660253e+01 8 2 0 0
[4]
23 matches
Mail list logo
