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
