[28303] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 9667 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Wed Aug 30 18:10:16 2006
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Wed, 30 Aug 2006 Volume: 10 Number: 9667
Today's topics:
Re: Hi Guys ! <rajeshmvj@gmail.com>
Re: Hi Guys ! usenet@DavidFilmer.com
Re: Hi Guys ! <uri@stemsystems.com>
Re: Hi Guys ! <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Re: Hi Guys ! <tadmc@augustmail.com>
Re: Hi Guys ! usenet@DavidFilmer.com
Re: Hi Guys ! <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Re: Hi Guys ! <justin.0608@purestblue.com>
Re: Hi Guys ! <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us>
Re: imagemagick very slow - is there anything better? <kees@example.net>
Re: imagemagick very slow - is there anything better? <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Re: Net-SNMP, community !~ public, JBOSS-4.0.4.GA <hjj@wheel.dk>
Net::SMTP problem <mda@unb.ca>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 2006 10:00:54 -0700
From: "rock" <rajeshmvj@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <1156957254.244116.142240@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
> What this percentage means ? can u explain
>
> 42.3%
>
>
> --
> Tad McClellan SGML consulting
> tadmc@augustmail.com Perl programming
> Fort Worth, Texas
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 2006 10:34:56 -0700
From: usenet@DavidFilmer.com
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <1156959296.051557.298120@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
rock wrote:
> What this percentage means ? can u explain
>
> TM> 42.3%
It's the ratio of the cross-lateral amortization of the recruitment
node's impedance (but I think Tad's figure is a bit out of date - that
looks like June's number. The July figure (the most recent available)
is 42.1% - it dropped a little mainly due to reintermediated
facorization). But you probably wanted the induction-lateral
recruitment figure (not the prefactored cross-lateral); the
non-factored induction-lateral recruitment ratio is more like 44.81%
(as of July).
--
David Filmer (http://DavidFilmer.com)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 13:35:01 -0400
From: Uri Guttman <uri@stemsystems.com>
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <x7bqq2nn3u.fsf@mail.sysarch.com>
>>>>> "r" == rock <rajeshmvj@gmail.com> writes:
>> What this percentage means ? can u explain
>>
>> 42.3%
it is the percentage of your brain cells that have long been dead.
do you have an actual perl question?
in any case read this group's guidelines that are posted
regularly. you can also find them by searching google groups.
uri
--
Uri Guttman ------ uri@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.stemsystems.com
--Perl Consulting, Stem Development, Systems Architecture, Design and Coding-
Search or Offer Perl Jobs ---------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:37:54 +0000 (UTC)
From: "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid>
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <Xns982F8AAB53855asu1cornelledu@132.236.56.8>
"rock" <rajeshmvj@gmail.com> wrote in news:1156957254.244116.142240
@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
[ Please quote properly when you respond. Please do not quote signatures. ]
>> What this percentage means ? can u explain
>>
>> 42.3%
Well, frankly, Tad was being a tad imprecise. I think the 95% confidence
interval for the percentage is [39.4%, 44.3%].
Sinan
PS: If you want to be taken seriously, you might want to consider posting a
question that makes sense. I have read and re-read your original post many
times, and I cannot even begin to imagine being able to ascertain what you
are asking.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:39:11 -0500
From: Tad McClellan <tadmc@augustmail.com>
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <slrnefbj9v.1go.tadmc@magna.augustmail.com>
usenet@DavidFilmer.com <usenet@DavidFilmer.com> wrote:
> rock wrote:
>> What this percentage means ? can u explain
>>
>> TM> 42.3%
>
> It's the ratio of the cross-lateral amortization of the recruitment
> node's impedance
How did you know that?
Did you concentrate while holding your forehead against the monitor
or something? That's how I do it.
> (but I think Tad's figure is a bit out of date - that
> looks like June's number. The July figure (the most recent available)
> is 42.1% - it dropped a little mainly due to reintermediated
> facorization).
That's enough, Smarty Pants.
> But you probably wanted the induction-lateral
> recruitment figure (not the prefactored cross-lateral); the
> non-factored induction-lateral recruitment ratio is more like 44.81%
> (as of July).
Cool! I didn't know how to calculate that one. Thanks for the tip!
--
Tad McClellan SGML consulting
tadmc@augustmail.com Perl programming
Fort Worth, Texas
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 2006 10:58:01 -0700
From: usenet@DavidFilmer.com
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <1156960681.373972.138710@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Tad McClellan wrote:
> Cool! I didn't know how to calculate that one. Thanks for the tip!
I should probably put a module up on CPAN. Acme::BullShit or something
like that.
--
David Filmer (http://DavidFilmer.com)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 12:25:06 -0600
From: Scott Bryce <sbryce@scottbryce.com>
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <g8ydnQj6e8ucRWjZnZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@comcast.com>
rock wrote:
>
>>What this percentage means ? can u explain
>>
>>42.3%
It means that nobody here is able to make sense out of your original
question.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:31:29 -0000
From: Justin C <justin.0608@purestblue.com>
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <slrnefbm9v.40t.justin.0608@moonlight.purestblue.com>
On 2006-08-30, usenet@DavidFilmer.com <usenet@DavidFilmer.com> wrote:
> Tad McClellan wrote:
>
>> Cool! I didn't know how to calculate that one. Thanks for the tip!
>
> I should probably put a module up on CPAN. Acme::BullShit or something
> like that.
Will you announce it here when you've uploaded?
Justin.
--
Justin C, by the sea.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 11:56:58 -0700
From: Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us>
Subject: Re: Hi Guys !
Message-Id: <qk3hs3xnrc.ln2@goaway.wombat.san-francisco.ca.us>
On 2006-08-30, Justin C <justin.0608@purestblue.com> wrote:
> On 2006-08-30, usenet@DavidFilmer.com <usenet@DavidFilmer.com> wrote:
>> Tad McClellan wrote:
>>
>>> Cool! I didn't know how to calculate that one. Thanks for the tip!
>>
>> I should probably put a module up on CPAN. Acme::BullShit or something
>> like that.
>
> Will you announce it here when you've uploaded?
I think said announcement should be written using the module. :)
--keith
--
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:10:00 +0200
From: Kees <kees@example.net>
Subject: Re: imagemagick very slow - is there anything better?
Message-Id: <44f5e289$0$4512$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
andy baxter schreef:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:26:18 +0100, andy baxter wrote:
>
>> hello,
>>
>> I'm writing a short perl program to split up a map image into tiles at
>> various zoom levels so I can use it in a 'google maps' style javascript
>> applet. I'm using PerlMagick to do the image manipulation, and it is
>> running /very/ slowly. The original image is quite big (4143 x 4728
>> pixels), so I would expect it to take a while, but not 20 minutes +
>> before it even finishes loading the image.
>
> I've now finished the program using imlib2, and it's working nicely.
> Conclusion - unless you need its more sophisticated functions, don't
> bother with imagemagick; use imlib2 instead.
I have used Image/Perl-Magick for various projects. Even doing complex
online transformations of large uploaded pictures I found it to be quite
fast.
Your source image is 4143 x 4728, assuming true color (you mentioned
jpeg, otherwise better go for png), that is about 450 Mb. Zooming that
to twice the size with:
$err=$image->Resize(width=>$imWidth*$zoom,height=>$imHeight*$zoom);
This will result in a memory footprint of around 2 Gb, just for the
picture. If you try to zoom further this gets completely out of hand.
Based on this, I suspect that you run out of memory. Even your virtual
memory will get exhausted real quick this way.
Perhaps you should consider another algorithm.
Kees
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:19:08 +0200
From: "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Subject: Re: imagemagick very slow - is there anything better?
Message-Id: <slrnefc06g.bkv.hjp-usenet2@yoyo.hjp.at>
On 2006-08-30 19:10, Kees <kees@example.net> wrote:
> Your source image is 4143 x 4728, assuming true color (you mentioned
> jpeg, otherwise better go for png), that is about 450 Mb.
^^^^^^^
Just to clarify, that's 450 Mbits, not 450 Mbytes. Assuming that 24 bits
of image data are stored in 4 bytes of memory, that translates to about
74 Mbytes.
hp
--
_ | Peter J. Holzer | > Wieso sollte man etwas erfinden was nicht
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR | > ist?
| | | hjp@hjp.at | Was sonst wäre der Sinn des Erfindens?
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | -- P. Einstein u. V. Gringmuth in desd
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 2006 16:35:23 GMT
From: Hans =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen?= Jakobsen <hjj@wheel.dk>
Subject: Re: Net-SNMP, community !~ public, JBOSS-4.0.4.GA
Message-Id: <slrnefbfib.bna.hjj@freesbee.wheel.dk>
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:35:35 +0200, milaus wrote:
> Hi all,
> sorry for mistakes I did in previous posting. I hope to do better now,
> starting from the subject :-)
> Since the last JBOSS version (4.0.4.GA), a SNMP-agent has been added to
> the application server.
> I'm writing a perl-script to monitor JBOSS via snmp, by using Net::SNMP
> 5.20 perl module.
> The problem is that if I set a community different from 'public',
> snmp-queries done via NET::SNMP module on JBOSS snmp-agent don't work.
> While snmp-queries done via 'snmpget' command (from command line) on JBOSS
> snmp-agent work perfecty with any community.
> I worte a little script to isolate the problem:
>
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> use strict;
> use warnings;
> use Net::SNMP;
> my ($session,$error) = Net::SNMP->session(Hostname => $ARGV[0],
> Community => $ARGV[1]);
> die "session error: $error" unless ($session);
> printf("Hostname: %s Community: %s OID: %s\n", $ARGV[0], $ARGV[1], $ARGV[2]);
> my $result = $session->get_request("$ARGV[2]");
> die "request error: ".$session->error unless (defined $result);
> $session->close;
> print "OID requested: ".$result->{"$ARGV[2]"}."\n";
> ### myscript.pl end ###
>
> I tested the problem in this scenario:
> - host wi064111 running CentOS 4.3
> -- JBOSS running snmp-adaptor.sar with community 'public' on port 11112
> -- JBOSS running snmp-adaptor.sar with community 'q3lrcdjb' on port 11212
> -- snmpd daemon running on port 161 (tested with both previous communities)
>
> The result of my tests is:
>
> 1) 'snmpget' command works perfectly quering both snmpd daemon and JBOSS
> snmp-agent, with any community:
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# snmpget -c public -v 1 10.102.64.111:161 .1.3.6.1.2.1.4.1.0
> IP-MIB::ipForwarding.0 = INTEGER: notForwarding(2)
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# snmpget -c q3lrcdjb -v 1 10.102.64.111:161
> .1.3.6.1.2.1.4.1.0
> IP-MIB::ipForwarding.0 = INTEGER: notForwarding(2)
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# snmpget -c public -v 1 10.102.64.111:11112 1.2.3.4.1.2
> iso.2.3.4.1.2 = Gauge32: 92686392
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# snmpget -c q3lrcdjb -v 1 10.102.64.111:11212
> 1.2.3.4.1.2
> iso.2.3.4.1.2 = Gauge32: 94004080
>
> 2) myscript.pl works perfectly quering snmpd daemon, with any community:
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# ./myscript.pl wi064111:161 public 1.3.6.1.2.1.4.1.0
> Hostname: wi064111:161 Community: public OID: 1.3.6.1.2.1.4.1.0
> OID requested: 2
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# ./myscript.pl wi064111:161 q3lrcdjb 1.3.6.1.2.1.4.1.0
> Hostname: wi064111:161 Community: q3lrcdjb OID: 1.3.6.1.2.1.4.1.0
> OID requested: 2
>
> 3) myscript.pl queries on JBOSS snmp-agent work only with community
> 'public':
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# ./myscript.pl wi064111:11112 public 1.2.3.4.1.2
> Hostname: wi064111:11112 Community: public OID: 1.2.3.4.1.2
> OID requested: 91884232
>
> [root@wi064111 ~]# ./myscript.pl wi064111:11212 q3lrcdjb 1.2.3.4.1.2
> Hostname: wi064111:11212 Community: q3lrcdjb OID: 1.2.3.4.1.2
> request error: Bad incoming community [public] at ./myscript.pl line 10.
> ************************************************************************
> THIS IS THE ERROR I GET.
>
> Now, NET::SNMP module seems to be ok because works perfectly with snmpd
> daemon. On the other side, JBOSS snmp-agent seems to be ok because answers
> perfectly to snmpget queries.
> But NET::SNMP module with JBOSS snmp-agent doesn'work correctly. Moreover
> the error is caused by $session->get_request line, and not by
> Net::SNMP->session line. It seems like JBOSS snmp-agent would expect a new
> authentication every request.
>
> Could the error be in NET::SNMP module implementation?
>
> Thanks to everyone who just read the whole post,
> Marco
>
Do you get the community transfered from the command line to the Net::SNMP
module?
Try: ./myscript.pl wi064111:11112 anythingButPublic 1.2.3.4.1.2
The examples I found at CPAN has a somewhat other syntax than you uses.
Have you considered use the perlmodule from net-snmp. Net-snmp might be
what you are using through you command line utilities.
(http://net-snmp.sourceforge.net/)
Net::SNMP is not at all the same as net-snmp!!
/hjj
------------------------------
Date: 30 Aug 2006 12:00:09 -0700
From: "Matt" <mda@unb.ca>
Subject: Net::SMTP problem
Message-Id: <1156964409.840792.180040@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
have a simple few lines of Perl I'm trying to run from a cgi program
to send some email.
My code looks like:
use Net::SMTP;
my $email="mda\@x.com";
my $msg="hello tst\n";
$smtp = Net::SMTP->new('smtp.x.com');# or die "Unable to open
the connection";
$smtp->mail('...@yahoo.com');
$smtp->to($email);
$smtp->data($msg);
$smtp->dataend();
$smtp->quit;
When I run the code via command line it works. When I run it via a cgi
program from a webpage I get when it dies on the SMTP->new line:
Can't call method "mail" on an undefined value
Everything I"ve searched for says it is because my script cannot
contact the smtp server, but that's not the case because when I run it
via the command line, it works fine.
It looks like it has to be some permisssion thing, either in sendmail
or apache.
Any thoughts?
Thanks
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V10 Issue 9667
***************************************
