Solving overdetermined system by QR decomposition Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)What does QR decomposition have to do with least squares method?Check Whether an Overdetermined Linear Equation System is Consistent: General Approach?Is the least squares solution to an overdetermined system a triangle center?Solving a feasible system of linear equations using Linear ProgrammingProving unique solution exists for a system of equationsSolve an overdetermined system of linear equationsSolving overdetermined linear system with $3$ equations in $2$ unknownsOverdetermined System Ax=bSolving a system by using Cholesky Decomposition $(LDL^T)$Solving $Ax = b$ using least squares (minimize $||Ax -b||_2$)How to do Given's rotation for $3x2$ matrix? (QR decomposition)

How to say that you spent the night with someone, you were only sleeping and nothing else?

What is the largest species of polychaete?

Replacing HDD with SSD; what about non-APFS/APFS?

Do working physicists consider Newtonian mechanics to be "falsified"?

Array/tabular for long multiplication

If A makes B more likely then B makes A more likely"

When is phishing education going too far?

How did the aliens keep their waters separated?

Is there folklore associating late breastfeeding with low intelligence and/or gullibility?

Passing functions in C++

Losing the Initialization Vector in Cipher Block Chaining

Am I ethically obligated to go into work on an off day if the reason is sudden?

How many spell slots should a Fighter 11/Ranger 9 have?

Notation for two qubit composite product state

Using "nakedly" instead of "with nothing on"

Aligning matrix of nodes with grid

Determine whether f is a function, an injection, a surjection

What did Darwin mean by 'squib' here?

Can a zero nonce be safely used with AES-GCM if the key is random and never used again?

If I can make up priors, why can't I make up posteriors?

Writing Thesis: Copying from published papers

What computer would be fastest for Mathematica Home Edition?

Can the prologue be the backstory of your main character?

What are the performance impacts of 'functional' Rust?



Solving overdetermined system by QR decomposition



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)What does QR decomposition have to do with least squares method?Check Whether an Overdetermined Linear Equation System is Consistent: General Approach?Is the least squares solution to an overdetermined system a triangle center?Solving a feasible system of linear equations using Linear ProgrammingProving unique solution exists for a system of equationsSolve an overdetermined system of linear equationsSolving overdetermined linear system with $3$ equations in $2$ unknownsOverdetermined System Ax=bSolving a system by using Cholesky Decomposition $(LDL^T)$Solving $Ax = b$ using least squares (minimize $||Ax -b||_2$)How to do Given's rotation for $3x2$ matrix? (QR decomposition)










3












$begingroup$


I need to solve $Ax=b$ in lots of ways using QR decomposition.



$$A = beginbmatrix
1 & 1 \
-1 & 1 \
1 & 2
endbmatrix, b = beginbmatrix
1 \
0 \
1
endbmatrix$$



This is an overdetermined system. That is, it has more equations than needed for a unique solution.



I need to find $min ||Ax-b||$. How should I solve it using QR?



I know that QR can be used to reduce the problem to
$$Vert Ax - b Vert = Vert QRx - b Vert = Vert Rx - Q^-1b Vert.$$



but what do I do after this?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$
















    3












    $begingroup$


    I need to solve $Ax=b$ in lots of ways using QR decomposition.



    $$A = beginbmatrix
    1 & 1 \
    -1 & 1 \
    1 & 2
    endbmatrix, b = beginbmatrix
    1 \
    0 \
    1
    endbmatrix$$



    This is an overdetermined system. That is, it has more equations than needed for a unique solution.



    I need to find $min ||Ax-b||$. How should I solve it using QR?



    I know that QR can be used to reduce the problem to
    $$Vert Ax - b Vert = Vert QRx - b Vert = Vert Rx - Q^-1b Vert.$$



    but what do I do after this?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      3












      3








      3





      $begingroup$


      I need to solve $Ax=b$ in lots of ways using QR decomposition.



      $$A = beginbmatrix
      1 & 1 \
      -1 & 1 \
      1 & 2
      endbmatrix, b = beginbmatrix
      1 \
      0 \
      1
      endbmatrix$$



      This is an overdetermined system. That is, it has more equations than needed for a unique solution.



      I need to find $min ||Ax-b||$. How should I solve it using QR?



      I know that QR can be used to reduce the problem to
      $$Vert Ax - b Vert = Vert QRx - b Vert = Vert Rx - Q^-1b Vert.$$



      but what do I do after this?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I need to solve $Ax=b$ in lots of ways using QR decomposition.



      $$A = beginbmatrix
      1 & 1 \
      -1 & 1 \
      1 & 2
      endbmatrix, b = beginbmatrix
      1 \
      0 \
      1
      endbmatrix$$



      This is an overdetermined system. That is, it has more equations than needed for a unique solution.



      I need to find $min ||Ax-b||$. How should I solve it using QR?



      I know that QR can be used to reduce the problem to
      $$Vert Ax - b Vert = Vert QRx - b Vert = Vert Rx - Q^-1b Vert.$$



      but what do I do after this?







      linear-algebra numerical-methods numerical-linear-algebra






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked 2 days ago









      Guerlando OCsGuerlando OCs

      11321856




      11321856




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          7












          $begingroup$

          The most straightforward way I know is to pass through the normal equations:



          $$A^T A x = A^T b$$



          and substitute in the $QR$ decomposition of $A$ (with the convention $Q in mathbbR^m times n,R in mathbbR^n times n$). Thus you get



          $$R^T Q^T Q R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          But $Q^T Q=I_n$. (Note that in this convention $Q$ isn't an orthogonal matrix, so $Q Q^T neq I_m$, but this doesn't matter here.) Thus:



          $$R^T R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          If $A$ has linearly independent columns (as is usually the case with overdetermined systems), then $R^T$ is injective, so by multiplying both sides by the left inverse of $R^T$ you get



          $$Rx=Q^T b.$$



          This system is now easy to solve numerically.



          For numerical purposes it's important that the removal of $Q^T Q$ and $R^T$ from the problem is done analytically, and in particular $A^T A$ is never constructed numerically.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Is there any reason to make this so convoluted? From $Ax=b$ you have $QRx=b$, multiply by $Q^T$ on the left.
            $endgroup$
            – Martin Argerami
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MartinArgerami Because actually the least squares solution usually does not satisfy $Ax=b$. This simple perspective only shows you that this approach gives you a solution when a solution exists. Now you could argue directly that multiplying both sides by $Q^T$ furnishes an equation whose solution is the least squares solution. (Such an argument would resemble the usual geometric argument for deriving the normal equations.) This would make a good alternative answer to mine.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago



















          2












          $begingroup$

          Note that $Rx$ has the form
          $$Rx = beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ 0endbmatrix $$
          , so if $$ Q^-1b = beginbmatrix z_1 \ z_2 \ z_3endbmatrix$$
          then $|| Rx - Q^-1b||$ will be minimal for $y_1 = z_1$, $y_2=z_2$. This set of equation is no longer overdetermined.



          Using matrix notation, if tou write $R = beginbmatrix R_1 \ 0endbmatrix$ and intoduce $P=beginbmatrix1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1& 0endbmatrix$, then you have
          $$ R_1x = PQ^-1b$$
          $$ x = (R_1)^-1PQ^-1b$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The key trick in this answer is that by the orthogonality, $| Ax - b | = | Rx - Q^T b |$.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Ian, That's something that OP has alredy obtained on his own (since $Q$ is orthogonal, $Q^-1=Q^T$).
            $endgroup$
            – Adam Latosiński
            yesterday












          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3185239%2fsolving-overdetermined-system-by-qr-decomposition%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          7












          $begingroup$

          The most straightforward way I know is to pass through the normal equations:



          $$A^T A x = A^T b$$



          and substitute in the $QR$ decomposition of $A$ (with the convention $Q in mathbbR^m times n,R in mathbbR^n times n$). Thus you get



          $$R^T Q^T Q R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          But $Q^T Q=I_n$. (Note that in this convention $Q$ isn't an orthogonal matrix, so $Q Q^T neq I_m$, but this doesn't matter here.) Thus:



          $$R^T R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          If $A$ has linearly independent columns (as is usually the case with overdetermined systems), then $R^T$ is injective, so by multiplying both sides by the left inverse of $R^T$ you get



          $$Rx=Q^T b.$$



          This system is now easy to solve numerically.



          For numerical purposes it's important that the removal of $Q^T Q$ and $R^T$ from the problem is done analytically, and in particular $A^T A$ is never constructed numerically.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Is there any reason to make this so convoluted? From $Ax=b$ you have $QRx=b$, multiply by $Q^T$ on the left.
            $endgroup$
            – Martin Argerami
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MartinArgerami Because actually the least squares solution usually does not satisfy $Ax=b$. This simple perspective only shows you that this approach gives you a solution when a solution exists. Now you could argue directly that multiplying both sides by $Q^T$ furnishes an equation whose solution is the least squares solution. (Such an argument would resemble the usual geometric argument for deriving the normal equations.) This would make a good alternative answer to mine.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago
















          7












          $begingroup$

          The most straightforward way I know is to pass through the normal equations:



          $$A^T A x = A^T b$$



          and substitute in the $QR$ decomposition of $A$ (with the convention $Q in mathbbR^m times n,R in mathbbR^n times n$). Thus you get



          $$R^T Q^T Q R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          But $Q^T Q=I_n$. (Note that in this convention $Q$ isn't an orthogonal matrix, so $Q Q^T neq I_m$, but this doesn't matter here.) Thus:



          $$R^T R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          If $A$ has linearly independent columns (as is usually the case with overdetermined systems), then $R^T$ is injective, so by multiplying both sides by the left inverse of $R^T$ you get



          $$Rx=Q^T b.$$



          This system is now easy to solve numerically.



          For numerical purposes it's important that the removal of $Q^T Q$ and $R^T$ from the problem is done analytically, and in particular $A^T A$ is never constructed numerically.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Is there any reason to make this so convoluted? From $Ax=b$ you have $QRx=b$, multiply by $Q^T$ on the left.
            $endgroup$
            – Martin Argerami
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MartinArgerami Because actually the least squares solution usually does not satisfy $Ax=b$. This simple perspective only shows you that this approach gives you a solution when a solution exists. Now you could argue directly that multiplying both sides by $Q^T$ furnishes an equation whose solution is the least squares solution. (Such an argument would resemble the usual geometric argument for deriving the normal equations.) This would make a good alternative answer to mine.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago














          7












          7








          7





          $begingroup$

          The most straightforward way I know is to pass through the normal equations:



          $$A^T A x = A^T b$$



          and substitute in the $QR$ decomposition of $A$ (with the convention $Q in mathbbR^m times n,R in mathbbR^n times n$). Thus you get



          $$R^T Q^T Q R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          But $Q^T Q=I_n$. (Note that in this convention $Q$ isn't an orthogonal matrix, so $Q Q^T neq I_m$, but this doesn't matter here.) Thus:



          $$R^T R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          If $A$ has linearly independent columns (as is usually the case with overdetermined systems), then $R^T$ is injective, so by multiplying both sides by the left inverse of $R^T$ you get



          $$Rx=Q^T b.$$



          This system is now easy to solve numerically.



          For numerical purposes it's important that the removal of $Q^T Q$ and $R^T$ from the problem is done analytically, and in particular $A^T A$ is never constructed numerically.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          The most straightforward way I know is to pass through the normal equations:



          $$A^T A x = A^T b$$



          and substitute in the $QR$ decomposition of $A$ (with the convention $Q in mathbbR^m times n,R in mathbbR^n times n$). Thus you get



          $$R^T Q^T Q R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          But $Q^T Q=I_n$. (Note that in this convention $Q$ isn't an orthogonal matrix, so $Q Q^T neq I_m$, but this doesn't matter here.) Thus:



          $$R^T R x = R^T Q^T b.$$



          If $A$ has linearly independent columns (as is usually the case with overdetermined systems), then $R^T$ is injective, so by multiplying both sides by the left inverse of $R^T$ you get



          $$Rx=Q^T b.$$



          This system is now easy to solve numerically.



          For numerical purposes it's important that the removal of $Q^T Q$ and $R^T$ from the problem is done analytically, and in particular $A^T A$ is never constructed numerically.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 2 days ago

























          answered 2 days ago









          IanIan

          69.2k25392




          69.2k25392







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Is there any reason to make this so convoluted? From $Ax=b$ you have $QRx=b$, multiply by $Q^T$ on the left.
            $endgroup$
            – Martin Argerami
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MartinArgerami Because actually the least squares solution usually does not satisfy $Ax=b$. This simple perspective only shows you that this approach gives you a solution when a solution exists. Now you could argue directly that multiplying both sides by $Q^T$ furnishes an equation whose solution is the least squares solution. (Such an argument would resemble the usual geometric argument for deriving the normal equations.) This would make a good alternative answer to mine.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago













          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Is there any reason to make this so convoluted? From $Ax=b$ you have $QRx=b$, multiply by $Q^T$ on the left.
            $endgroup$
            – Martin Argerami
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MartinArgerami Because actually the least squares solution usually does not satisfy $Ax=b$. This simple perspective only shows you that this approach gives you a solution when a solution exists. Now you could argue directly that multiplying both sides by $Q^T$ furnishes an equation whose solution is the least squares solution. (Such an argument would resemble the usual geometric argument for deriving the normal equations.) This would make a good alternative answer to mine.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Is there any reason to make this so convoluted? From $Ax=b$ you have $QRx=b$, multiply by $Q^T$ on the left.
          $endgroup$
          – Martin Argerami
          2 days ago




          $begingroup$
          Is there any reason to make this so convoluted? From $Ax=b$ you have $QRx=b$, multiply by $Q^T$ on the left.
          $endgroup$
          – Martin Argerami
          2 days ago












          $begingroup$
          @MartinArgerami Because actually the least squares solution usually does not satisfy $Ax=b$. This simple perspective only shows you that this approach gives you a solution when a solution exists. Now you could argue directly that multiplying both sides by $Q^T$ furnishes an equation whose solution is the least squares solution. (Such an argument would resemble the usual geometric argument for deriving the normal equations.) This would make a good alternative answer to mine.
          $endgroup$
          – Ian
          2 days ago





          $begingroup$
          @MartinArgerami Because actually the least squares solution usually does not satisfy $Ax=b$. This simple perspective only shows you that this approach gives you a solution when a solution exists. Now you could argue directly that multiplying both sides by $Q^T$ furnishes an equation whose solution is the least squares solution. (Such an argument would resemble the usual geometric argument for deriving the normal equations.) This would make a good alternative answer to mine.
          $endgroup$
          – Ian
          2 days ago












          2












          $begingroup$

          Note that $Rx$ has the form
          $$Rx = beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ 0endbmatrix $$
          , so if $$ Q^-1b = beginbmatrix z_1 \ z_2 \ z_3endbmatrix$$
          then $|| Rx - Q^-1b||$ will be minimal for $y_1 = z_1$, $y_2=z_2$. This set of equation is no longer overdetermined.



          Using matrix notation, if tou write $R = beginbmatrix R_1 \ 0endbmatrix$ and intoduce $P=beginbmatrix1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1& 0endbmatrix$, then you have
          $$ R_1x = PQ^-1b$$
          $$ x = (R_1)^-1PQ^-1b$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The key trick in this answer is that by the orthogonality, $| Ax - b | = | Rx - Q^T b |$.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Ian, That's something that OP has alredy obtained on his own (since $Q$ is orthogonal, $Q^-1=Q^T$).
            $endgroup$
            – Adam Latosiński
            yesterday
















          2












          $begingroup$

          Note that $Rx$ has the form
          $$Rx = beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ 0endbmatrix $$
          , so if $$ Q^-1b = beginbmatrix z_1 \ z_2 \ z_3endbmatrix$$
          then $|| Rx - Q^-1b||$ will be minimal for $y_1 = z_1$, $y_2=z_2$. This set of equation is no longer overdetermined.



          Using matrix notation, if tou write $R = beginbmatrix R_1 \ 0endbmatrix$ and intoduce $P=beginbmatrix1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1& 0endbmatrix$, then you have
          $$ R_1x = PQ^-1b$$
          $$ x = (R_1)^-1PQ^-1b$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The key trick in this answer is that by the orthogonality, $| Ax - b | = | Rx - Q^T b |$.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Ian, That's something that OP has alredy obtained on his own (since $Q$ is orthogonal, $Q^-1=Q^T$).
            $endgroup$
            – Adam Latosiński
            yesterday














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Note that $Rx$ has the form
          $$Rx = beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ 0endbmatrix $$
          , so if $$ Q^-1b = beginbmatrix z_1 \ z_2 \ z_3endbmatrix$$
          then $|| Rx - Q^-1b||$ will be minimal for $y_1 = z_1$, $y_2=z_2$. This set of equation is no longer overdetermined.



          Using matrix notation, if tou write $R = beginbmatrix R_1 \ 0endbmatrix$ and intoduce $P=beginbmatrix1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1& 0endbmatrix$, then you have
          $$ R_1x = PQ^-1b$$
          $$ x = (R_1)^-1PQ^-1b$$






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Note that $Rx$ has the form
          $$Rx = beginbmatrix y_1 \ y_2 \ 0endbmatrix $$
          , so if $$ Q^-1b = beginbmatrix z_1 \ z_2 \ z_3endbmatrix$$
          then $|| Rx - Q^-1b||$ will be minimal for $y_1 = z_1$, $y_2=z_2$. This set of equation is no longer overdetermined.



          Using matrix notation, if tou write $R = beginbmatrix R_1 \ 0endbmatrix$ and intoduce $P=beginbmatrix1 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 1& 0endbmatrix$, then you have
          $$ R_1x = PQ^-1b$$
          $$ x = (R_1)^-1PQ^-1b$$







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 2 days ago









          Adam LatosińskiAdam Latosiński

          6518




          6518







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The key trick in this answer is that by the orthogonality, $| Ax - b | = | Rx - Q^T b |$.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Ian, That's something that OP has alredy obtained on his own (since $Q$ is orthogonal, $Q^-1=Q^T$).
            $endgroup$
            – Adam Latosiński
            yesterday













          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The key trick in this answer is that by the orthogonality, $| Ax - b | = | Rx - Q^T b |$.
            $endgroup$
            – Ian
            2 days ago










          • $begingroup$
            @Ian, That's something that OP has alredy obtained on his own (since $Q$ is orthogonal, $Q^-1=Q^T$).
            $endgroup$
            – Adam Latosiński
            yesterday








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          The key trick in this answer is that by the orthogonality, $| Ax - b | = | Rx - Q^T b |$.
          $endgroup$
          – Ian
          2 days ago




          $begingroup$
          The key trick in this answer is that by the orthogonality, $| Ax - b | = | Rx - Q^T b |$.
          $endgroup$
          – Ian
          2 days ago












          $begingroup$
          @Ian, That's something that OP has alredy obtained on his own (since $Q$ is orthogonal, $Q^-1=Q^T$).
          $endgroup$
          – Adam Latosiński
          yesterday





          $begingroup$
          @Ian, That's something that OP has alredy obtained on his own (since $Q$ is orthogonal, $Q^-1=Q^T$).
          $endgroup$
          – Adam Latosiński
          yesterday


















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3185239%2fsolving-overdetermined-system-by-qr-decomposition%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Grendel Contents Story Scholarship Depictions Notes References Navigation menu10.1093/notesj/gjn112Berserkeree

          Area configuration aggregation error after install Porto themeMagento 2.1 CE Installed but front/backend not loading/workingCSS not loading on page within Magento 2 pageCannot install module in Magento 2no commands defined in the “setup” namespace. in Magento2Magento 2: Static files are present but shows 404Why do i have to always run the commands to clean cache in Magento 2.1.8?Failure reason: 'Unable to unserialize value.'Error 500 after magento migrationIn production mode the site does not loadMagento 2 : Error 500 after installing

          Middle Expansion Olielle Resaix Definition: Uttering songs of triumph shouting with joy triumphant exulting Sejunction Journal 붙다 달 고급 품목 외출 The stretch trades the screeching tin. Definition: The act of speaking with a drawl a drawl Cough Sand Definition: An uproar a quarrel a noisy outbreak Shake Iron Publicize Horse House Baby 사과 Resaix Flaggy Jelly Temporary Unequaled Puppet A drop in the bucket Shrew 성격 회원 성질 미팅 The burn frames the tacky quality. Materialistic The smoke reduces the way. Yammoe Nondescript Cheek 얼굴 배 약하다 날리다 타다 The illegal country shows the iron. Help Rule Drearien Smoke Teaching Meaty Wasp Abraham Lincoln Jaws 진심 수리하다 Size Cork Idea Convert Think Lark John Lennon 거울 청소 군 추천하다 아이스크림