(My system always had 16GB RAM since installing insync.) Based on my personal experience of using insync, I had our company purchased insync licensing for specific accounts for headless use to sync specific folders from google drive to servers. ![]() But in normal runtime, only vary rare instance of noticeable system slowdown. Only on start up do I notice some system impact. While virtual memory is kind of high, but I noticed this seems to have to do with the number of files I have on my google drive. Insync does what I need, and the integrated repo updates makes it easy to keep up to date. I use insync on linux mint so it can sync the whole of my google drive to local disk, which allows me to backup (encrypt) once a month to a local raid storage (mostly to possible restore some files deleted from google drive years back. I've been using insync for since 2015, and still currently on the legacy Prime license. I do not recommend Insync for mission-critical data. This was simply a heart attack inducing situation. Once it was the day before we had a deadline for a project and had to prepare those files to be sent to client. It happened three times so far in two months when bulk of files just went to the trash across all the computers instead of being synced. Best case scenario was that some files weren't properly synced and I had to figure which to migrate manually via a pendrive. Insync got totally lost and couldn't keep track what to sync at times. But my use case is multiple computers, multiple shares, 2-3 users, hundreds of files synced daily. Maybe it's fine if you just want to sync your own files from a single computer. On the surface the features are good, but in reality Insync really struggles. The outcome of randomised controlled trials is awaited.I tried to use Insync on a linux laptop, while my main laptop was out of order. These changes were accompanied by clinically relevant improvements in functional status and QOL, as well as a measurable increase in LV performance. Long-term cardiac resynchronization can be safely and reliably achieved by transvenous atrial synchronized right and left ventricular pacing. ![]() In the 46 patients with complete echocardiographic data, LV ejection fraction increased from 21.7+/-6.4% at baseline to 26.1+/-9.0% at last follow-up (P = 0.006), LV end diastolic dimension decreased from 72.7+/-9.2 to 71.6+/-9.1 mm (P = 0.233), interventricular mechanical delay decreased from 27.5+/-32.1 to 20.3+/-25.5 ms (P = 0.243), mitral regurgitation apical four-chamber area decreased from 7.66+/-5.5 to 6.69+/-5.9 cm(2) (P = 0.197), and left ventricular filling time increased from 363+/-127 to 408+/-111 ms (P = 0.002). In addition, significant improvements were observed in mean NYHA functional class, 6-MW and QOL score. At each point of follow-up, a significant shortening of QRS duration was measured. ![]() Nine surviving patients were withdrawn from the study during long-term follow-up for miscellaneous reasons. The 12-month actuarial survival was 78% (CI 70-87%). Over a follow-up of 12 months, 21 patients died. A single, self-limiting procedure-related complication occurred. Measurements were repeated in all surviving patients at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after implantation of the CRS. Detailed echocardiographic data were also collected in a subset of 46 patients. Baseline evaluation included 12-lead electrocardiogram, estimation of New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, assessment of quality of life (QOL), and distance covered during a 6-min walk (6-MW). This study was designed to assess the safety and feasibility of an atrio-biventricular transvenous pacing system, and examine the long-term effects of cardiac resynchronization in patients with advanced heart failure and ventricular conduction abnormalities.Ä«etween August, 1997 and November, 1998, 103 patients received a cardiac resynchronization system (CRS) consisting of a pulse generator interfaced with an atrio-biventricular lead system, including a lead designed for left ventricular (LV) pacing via cardiac veins. Recent short-term observations have shown an improvement in cardiac function and heart failure symptoms from atrio-biventricular pacing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |