* the behavior described in {@link #put(Range, Object) put(range, value)}, however the ranges
   * returned from {@link #asMapOfRanges} will be different if there were existing entries which
   * connect to the given range and value.
   *
   * <p>Even if the input range is empty, if it is connected on both sides by ranges mapped to the
   * same value those two ranges will be coalesced.
   *

        populateFromSettings(request, settingsResult.getEffectiveSettings());

        if (!settingsResult.getProblems().isEmpty() && LOGGER.isWarnEnabled()) {
            LOGGER.warn("");
            LOGGER.warn("Some problems were encountered while building the effective settings");

            for (SettingsProblem problem : settingsResult.getProblems()) {
                LOGGER.warn("{} @ {}", problem.getMessage(), problem.getLocation());

    try {
      while (currentTask != self) {
        taskRunner.condition.await()
      }
    } finally {
      serialTaskQueue.remove(yieldCompleteTask)
    }

    // If we're yielding until we're exhausted and a task run, keep going until a task doesn't run.
    if (strategy == ResumePriority.AfterOtherTasks && otherTasksStarted) {
      return yieldUntil(strategy, condition)
    }
  }

    //    were added to the queue. It's easily possible for one thread to take the head of the
    //    queue, immediately followed by another thread taking the next element in the queue. That
    //    second thread can then dispatch to the subscriber it took before the first thread does.
    //
    // All this makes me really wonder if there's any value in queueing here at all. A dispatcher

type ReplicationMRFStats struct {
	LastFailedCount uint64 `json:"failedCount_last5min"`
	// Count of unreplicated entries that were dropped after MRF retry limit reached since cluster start.
	TotalDroppedCount uint64 `json:"droppedCount_since_uptime"`
	// Bytes of unreplicated entries that were dropped after MRF retry limit reached since cluster start.
	TotalDroppedBytes uint64 `json:"droppedBytes_since_uptime"`
}

				break
			}
		}
		if allEmpty {
			j.ObjectV2.PartETags = nil
		}
	}
	return o, err
}

// xlMetaV2VersionHeaderV2 is a version 2 of xlMetaV2VersionHeader before EcN and EcM were added.
type xlMetaV2VersionHeaderV2 struct {
	*xlMetaV2VersionHeader
}

// UnmarshalMsg implements msgp.Unmarshaler
func (z *xlMetaV2VersionHeaderV2) UnmarshalMsg(bts []byte) (o []byte, err error) {

emailing [******@****.***][codeofconduct_at]. For more details, please see our Reporting
Guidelines below.

Thanks
------

Some of the ideas and wording for the statements and guidelines above were based on work by the
[Twitter][twitter_coc], [Ubuntu][ubuntu_coc], [GDC][gdc_coc], and [Django][django_coc] communities.
We are thankful for their work.

Reporting Guide
---------------

| [`NSQ`](#NSQ)                     |                             |                                 |

## Prerequisites

- Install and configure MinIO Server from [here](https://min.io/docs/minio/linux/index.html#procedure).
- Install and configure MinIO Client from [here](https://min.io/docs/minio/linux/reference/minio-mc.html#quickstart).

```
$ mc admin config get myminio | grep notify

    }
  },
  /**
   * This strategy uses all 128 bits of {@link Hashing#murmur3_128} when hashing. It looks different
   * from the implementation in MURMUR128_MITZ_32 because we're avoiding the multiplication in the
   * loop and doing a (much simpler) += hash2. We're also changing the index to a positive number by
   * AND'ing with Long.MAX_VALUE instead of flipping the bits.
   */
  MURMUR128_MITZ_64() {
    @Override

        fail(
            "contents were not equal and in the same order: "
                + "expected = "
                + expected
                + ", actual = "
                + actual);
      }
    }

    if (expectedIter.hasNext() || actualIter.hasNext()) {
      // actual either had too few or too many elements
      fail(
          "contents were not equal and in the same order: "