Slashdot Mirror

"It's always fun to read bleedin' edgers rationnalize how they didn't pay over-the-top for immature first trys that soon got obsoleted." - by obarthelemy (160321) on Thursday July 23, @03:33PM (#28799041)

I've been using SSD's (& software ramdisks before these, since 1991 or thereabouts from DOS, thru Win9x, thru NT & later physical SSD's 2000/XP/Server 2003) since late 2002... & the type I use is NOT based on "FLASH" ram (w/ its limited lifespan + slower write speeds), & are mature.

First: In the CENATEK "RocketDrive" (PCI 2.2 bus @ 133mb/sec transfer rate, 2gb PC-133 SDRAM)...

Secondly/more currently/lately: In the GIGABYTE IRAM (SATA 1 bus @ 150mb/sec transfer rate, 4gb DDR-400 RAM)...

----

"I've got some oil here that will do wonder for your hair ! it is expensive, too" - by obarthelemy (160321) on Thursday July 23, @03:33PM (#28799041)

I can tell you, AND ALSO SHOW YOU, right now (& prove it) that these units work FAR faster than ordinary mechanical HDD's - Especially for seek/access (many orders of magnitude faster here by FAR) & READS (nearly 4x - 5x as fast here in fact, & in a test I had done using HDTach 3.x), which is MOST of what MOST USERS, do (reads, vs. writes) most of the time.

Results of said test, for your own reference &/or verification, vs. your statement I just quoted there above now?

See here, to verify my statements -> http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/storage-removable-media/interesting-comparison-i-did-2-diff-true-ssds-7819/

The results there should function to bear out the truth of my statements here... &, possibly, to "justify the expense" of this current crop of FLASH RAM based SSD units to others, because I was out to do so myself on the IRAM here (which the larger & more current FLASH RAM based units are more expensive than the type I use (@ least lately the current FLASH units cost more, but, these FLASH based units have a FAR LARGER storage capacity vs. the kinds I use))...

Also, that test of mine MAY possibly also function to give others some "unique ways" to utilize these units as well on their own systems, other than for a main bootup disk etc. et al! I apply mine for both read AND WRITE in nature tasks (because the type of SSD I use also does well on writes, whereas FLASH RAM based ones do not by way of comparison to the type I use).

I say this, simply because in that benchmark "drag race test" I did between the 2 units I use here, I also extoll the methods & means for which I use them for @ home for superior overall system performance

(E.G.-> PageFile.sys placement, %temp% & %tmp% placement, webbrowser cache location, spooler location, logging location for apps & the OS as much as possible to offload those tasks from my main C: drive (in essence speeding that up to by doing so) & to offset fragmentation those smallish files can create in their own selves + other files too, a "longer term" overall performance gain, in other words on that last note).

Also, many years earlier in 1996-2001, though I do not mention it in that test? How to use them for gain in "industrial environs" as well... this I outlined for BOTH CENATEK in a review I did for their RocketDrive unit (used to be on front page of their website in fact, until the server it was hosted on went down, not mine)... &, for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com, @ Ms TechEd 2001-2002 iirc, for my ideas for "creative uses of ramdisks", albeit in "industrial environs" also!

Which, again, took a company called EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com, whom are a certified MS partner (for whom I did some work on paid contract for in regards to software based ramdisks & diskcaches they produce (the type that works @ diskdriver level, NOT filesystem levels where I made it up

So I've never heard of you before, but you seem to like throwing your initials round APK, or Alexander Peter Kowalski.

Your initial comments seemed idiotic, you were complaining about your 15mb+ hosts file being slow to load. Sorry, but what the fuck? You have a 15mb+ hosts file? are you really that clueless about IT?

But you try and justify it all by talking about security so I figured hey, I'll see what this guys credentials are. Well, a quick search turned this up:

http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/pest/pest.aspx?id=51276

A piece of software that can arbitrarily run applications invisibly? Sorry what, did you really try and throw such a security threat onto consumer's PCs??

But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:

http://www.thorschrock.com/2008/05/19/how-to-respond-when-people-threaten-to-sue-you-on-the-web/

So not only do you produce an app. that is a massive security risk, not only do you fail to see why it has been validly categorised as such, but you throw a hissy fit and threaten to sue? Not only that, but continue to spam the comments section of that site for over a month continuing to whine?

People make mistakes though so fair enough, I figured I'm sure there's more to this guy. I found this:

http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html

Er, a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended? Again, do you have any idea about the subject you preach? Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk? Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security?

And there's more:

http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305

Threatening to sue again on online forums because people didn't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs?

Other than that, all I could find was a couple of dead web pages of yours and mention of a couple of long obsolete Delphi programs.

Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file.

The fact that using the hosts file so incorrectly inherently severely decreases performance of DNS lookups anyway seems lost on you.

You talk of security yet you produce applications that are security threats.

You threaten to sue anyone who points out that your applications are security threats, you threaten to sue people who do not like you using technical forums to advertise your programs.

You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in.

Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the .NET languages. Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with.

http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/storage-removable-media/interesting-comparison-i-did-2-diff-true-ssds-7819/

Oddly & IRONICALLY enough, to satisfy those here that "bitch about empirical evidence" & "anecdotal evidence" (trolls use this bullshit - a test done IS A TEST DONE, period)

Well - I did my OWN test in comparing 2 Solid-State drives (what I call "TRUE SSD's", because they're NOT based on FLASH RAM with its slower write cycles & limited lifespan) & had some interesting results, compared to a WD Raptor 74gb, used as my "SCIENTIFIC METHOD CONTROL ITEM"

(Though I Have the Raptor X + Velociraptor here also, but, I figure most folks do not own those or shell out the ca$h for them, so I used what most folks might want or be able to afford in my test (yesterday in fact)).

Drives used & results (in case you cannot see that post or its images without being a member) on HDTach's "LONG TEST":

GIGABYTE IRAM = 138.5 mb/sec + 3-4% CPU usage (this was the RANGE I saw in 3 test runs on CPU usage) & 0.1 ms access/seek

CENATEK ROCKETDRIVE = 124.5 mb/sec + 2-3% CPU usage (this was the RANGE I saw in 3 test runs on CPU usage) & 0.0 ms access/seek

Western Digital "RAPTOR" 74gb unit, 8mb cache 10,000 rpm diskdrive = 101.4 mb/sec + 2% CPU usage (this was the RANGE I saw in 3 test runs on CPU usage) & 8.8 ms access/seek

APK

P.S.=> The results make sense, especially comparing the tech involved with my "TRUE SSD's" (not flash ram based), because the CENATEK uses PCI 2.2 bus (133mb/sec theoretical max transferral rates) & PC-133 SDRAM... the GIGABYTE IRAM uses SATA 1 bus (150mb/sec theoretical transferral rates) + DDR-400 Kingston RAM (what I bought for it) & minus the bus mgt. overheads? The results matched the theoretical rates, perfectly, on throughput, but also on access/seek... apk

"Real coders write code that you can take a ruler from any given close brace and draw a vertical line right up to the matching open brace, every time" - by Glonoinha (587375) on Sunday July 20, @10:18AM (#24261963)

Agreed, 110% - it's how I code (so, I am a bit biased), as it makes for EASIER debugging (such as between C/C++ open/close braces &/or Delphi begin-end statements/reserved words)...

"Everybody else gets fired." - by Glonoinha (587375) on Sunday July 20, @10:18AM (#24261963)

OH, I dunno about THAT, lol... everyone has "off days" or is in a hurry etc. @ times, & @ times? They just need to be shown "better things" (purely relative term) is all... whether they use them or not though? Up to they. There are times I have seen where the "low man on the totem pole" comes up with a GREAT IDEA @ times too:

"Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn, @ least now & then!"

See - I wouldn't go & say I am a 'real coder' (purely relative term, I figure @ least, because if it works? IT WORKS... right?)

---

Then again - There is a matter of logical efficiency (& yes, readability/maintainability, + speed of operations too)

Sometimes though, that comes later ONLY...

---

Heck - I did so here recently, Early June this summer in fact!

APK Hosts File Grinder 4.0++:

http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html#post16032

It allows me to:

---

EASY Integrate the HOSTS files of others, such as mvps.org, & others... even if in other internal line-by-line formats, into the MOST EFFICIENT format that is (0[space]IP Address), first, & then...

Allows speed up access to your fav sites, via 1st pinging them, & adding them to the normalized non-repeat line items list on the right hand side of its screen.

Allows Add/remove sites from a hosts file, but by first checking for their pre-existence inside the HOSTS file on ADDS, & rejecting if there already (& adding if NOT present)

Lastly, it will FULLY NORMALIZE (accurately 110%) a HOSTS file (removal of duplicates)...leaving you with one in the MOST efficient format line-wise there is (consumes less memory & faster loadtime from disk) & fully alphabetized sorted.

---

I documented it in the URL above, @ a forums during its build in fact, & that helped me think believe it or not...

In doing so (rewrite or an earlier version that took DAYS of runtime, & is now down to 1-2 hours (over a massively unrealistic 1 million++ lines record entries HOSTS file test data set with repeats in it, for testing "normalization/repeats removal" (for ondisk & in memory efficiency of HOSTS file data + faster loadtime into RAM from disk, into the local DNS cache)?

Hey - I was happy w/ the result, so far (couple hours a night or on weekends @ most)... maybe 1 week total time, tops.

I achieved some "HUGE" gains in processing time efficiency + speed on a freeware I wrote years ago (but never released, it was poorly done, even in my opinion then 7 or so years ago, it worked, but SLOW in certain portions (normalizing a HOSTS file)), though I released others over time for others to use/enjoy, but ONLY when they were pretty fairly really well done (efficient enough, niceties for users, etc.).

---

When I need a tool? I just write it up myself... this is the neat part of being able to write code, don't you all agree? Nothing like being your own builder of your own desktop's "electric furniture & appliances", lol!

Want a job done right?? DO IT YOURSELF, & get EXACTLY what you want (much as how Harley bikers build their own bikes, OR, pc hardware folks building their own machines... which I figure, most coders do, anyhow too, for their OWN systems).

APK

P.S.=> Now, as to my self-assessment, on the "real coders" thing? Hey - IF you can get the j

I show myself "how it's done", by simply not 'throwing away' my older code, from older apps I have done over time... quite a bit!

E.G.=> I rewrote a HOSTS file mgt. tool I created around 2001-2002, because 1st time around, I didn't do as good a job as was possible (yes, I learn new things over time & usually "get better" as I go in doing so), here, where I literally 'documented' this program's progress (did it in my spare time @ night/weekends, maybe 1 wk. total time earlier this summer - bigger plans exist for it though, such as an FTP system to allow users to download newly updated HOSTS files from a central FTP server (still setting this part up though))

APK Hosts File Grinder 4.0++::

http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html

This program allows me to:

----

1.) Build a CUSTOM HOSTS FILE that is in * THE * MOST EFFICIENT FORM THERE IS (0URL) line-by-line format, so the file loads as FAST as possible (since it is tinier on disk, e.g.-> going from 127.0.0.1 to 0.0.0.0 alone? Well, I went from 19mb to 14mb - & THEN, in going from 0.0.0.0 to 0?? I went from 14mb to 11mb size on disk), AND also consumes the LEAST RAM in your local DNS cache...with NO repeat entries & alphabetically ordered.

2.) It builds the CUSTOM HOSTS FILE that secures you vs. the threats on bad sites &/or adbanners out there too

3.) Also, in addition to speeding up your websurfing (by NOT loading adbanners (again, especially malware infested ones) & such) - it will also optionally speed-up your fav. websites, by your hardcoding your fav sites into it, as far as IP to URL conversions - doing this, locally, is FAR faster than calling out to DNS servers (which can be poisoned, or "man-in-the-middle" attacked, too)).

4.) It will graphically allow you to search thru a HOSTS FILES' listings (mine are done in alphabetically-arranged order, so if you choose to do them in notepad.exe even, it is simpler) in their "sites to block" list, for adding in new ones (or, it will reject them as already existing, preventing repeat entries, aiding further in "normalization" (lack of repeats)).

5.) It will also, in BOTH the original list to process (on left) & in the "FINAL LIST" (on right) for save to disk, allow you to selectively remove elements in its lists, @ YOUR discretion, prior to saves to disk (easy to do, via rightclick on list popup menus)

----

By reusing my old code for various routines in it, I was able to finish it FAR FASTER, because I had done code for various portions in it, before in the past!

(From having done various freewares in the past (pinger & ftp tools) & also using the same code for MIS/IS/IT related programs (you do have to do "ping" apps quite a lot, & FTP code is great for updates or file transfers (especially sftp)), I have code that's PROVEN/SOLID, since 1997-2002, for various routines... those are just 2 examples, where I was able to "reuse" portions of code I have (Object Pascal UNITS, analogs to Basic .bas modules, or .h C/C++ headers I suppose), with little minimal effort in removing code that was "application specific" (once in a bit, I will STILL get "caught in that trap", even with modules... bit worse w/ objects & classes though @ times here (give me time, lol))).

I guess what I am trying to say is, the old adage:

"NEVER THROW AWAY YOUR OLD CODE!"

APK

P.S.=> Trying to put it into UNITS/HEADERS/MODULES is the best way, OR classes (if not full-blown objects) imo, but, the trouble is, sometimes... @ least here? I tend to put in code that's a "wee bit" too specific to the application @ hand, so, code reuse during design is still something I have to overcome @ times & get better @ I suppose... still, having your old code around? It can be a "lifesaver" (& certainly TIME SAVER), for sure... apk

"more cores won't get a single threaded process done faster." - by badboy_tw2002 (524611) on Monday July 14, @10:19PM (#24190701)

Oh, I'd have to say, that's NOT 'completely true'... & mainly because of the OS process scheduler kernel subsystems, & OTHER running processes + OTHER CPUs/Cores present....

Those other processes (from the OS & other apps running) MIGHT have been competing w/ said "single-threaded" designed process, on that SAME single core (or, even in an SMP/HT/SMT environs-system) in a single cpu/core system, OR otherwise...

Think about it:

E.G.-> Your process "A" there is probably doing some recursive activity, say string processing! Pretty heavy...

(Fact is, I just wrote an app along those lines for HOSTS file manipulations in fact, & it does pretty much as you describe (especially when I boost its parent thread (1 of 2) to REALTIME cpu priority (I allow this in this app) -> http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=58&stc=1&d=1214726022 , because of the nature of the work, string processing largely which is fairly CPU intensive/expensive, it actually sort of fits here, but, is multithreaded in design)...

See, you're not considering OTHER running processes (OR, threads even) that can/could be "shunted off" by the OS process scheduler kernel subsystem module, to OTHER Cpus/Cores present (emulated via H/T or otherwise, even true multi-cpu SMP arrangements - as its pretty much 'all the same' once this gets 'virtualized' to the OS via the HAL layer + drivers)... especially once the "main cpu/core" is saturated, or nearing it.

I.E.-> Once YOUR process (or mine) starts "tearing up" CPU core #1... if there are OTHER cpu cores present? The OS will send their child threads of execution off to said 'freer' cores... allowing your app to continue, while the OS + other program parent & child threads run off of the less cpu-cycle saturated/starved CPUs/Cores present...

APK

"Could the US have any more of an "attack mentality" than it already does?" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 02, @01:50PM (#22942088) ---

Just what Mr. Elder wants to see in fact, is in THIS thread (vs. "RBN" for example):

HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 & VISTA + make it "fun" to do, via CIS Tool Guidance:

http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/operating-systems/how-secure-windows-2000-xp-server-2003-vista-3550/

Doing MY part being 'patriotic', in "kill-mode", vs. "RBN"... not just defensive stuff is in THAT post, despite its title.

APK

P.S.=> Take a GOOD READ, Mr. Elder... hope it's what you're looking for! apk