It's KDE, not your memory usage. KDE out of the box is generally pretty darned slow. Ubuntu uses a pretty clean gnome install by default. Try installing KUbuntu (just apt-get kubuntu-desktop on your existing machine if you have a little free space and bandwidth). You'll get the option to either log in to KDE or Gnome in the "sessions" dialog on the login screen. KDE will probably feel slower, because it's a heavier desktop - but it's also a little more tightly integrated (for lack of a better description). Granted, SuSE tends to have an even heavier default, but most any default KDE will be kinda heavy all around because most of the time it's set to favor eye candy rather than performance.
That said, I'm running Ubuntu on my wife's workstation, Gentoo on mine (will switch to Ubuntu eventually), Slackware on one server, Ubuntu on another, and SuSE 10 on still another. A couple of workstations netboot Ubuntu now, and I'm replacing a RedHat 9 machine with Ubuntu shortly. I always wanted to be a Debian snob, and Ubuntu's policy of releasing software versions that have been released in the most recent decade has finally made that viable.:) Now if only they'd support the m68k target so I could run it on my presently NetBSD machines...
Everyone already knows Microsoft development and administration. They teach it in third grade now - you must have been out of school after they implemented that policy.
Most people couldn't start up AutoCAD and draw a cube, let alone a house. Heck, even starting up AutoCAD at all can be a bit involved. That is the single worst interface *ever* (ignoring the list of just about every app written using Motif) - unless you spend a year or two of your life memorizing all of the command line stuff. It's like vi, except with the same concepts applied to toolbars and less general use.
Sorry, </rant>. I was trying to build some stuff (a desk) using 80/20 parts a while back, and ended up using AutoCAD (they provide an AutoCAD plugin that generates a bill of materials, etc) as a great way to waste weeks of my time rather than just drawing it out to scale on graph paper or something simple like that.
Why would you get a 'Vette when you could get a CTS-V (or even a "regular" STS) for similar money? You're still able to get.90G and a 4.8s 0-60 on the factory rolling stock, you've got a 'Vette underneath you (watch them being built while you tour the Corvette plant), and you get something where "fit and finish" or "I stopped at the store on the way home and bought more than just a gallon of milk" can be mentioned in a description which doesn't also involve [possibly stifled] laughter. And no one expects to have their ass handed to them by "Grandpa in his Caddy"...:)
Then there's that thing where 'Vette people frequently tend to be mostly pompous asses who are more concerned with preserving their "future classic" and telling people how expensive their car was rather than really enjoying the drive.
"Sorry, you are only allowed to post up to 10 URLs within a few minutes. You might be behind a firewall or proxy - please try again in a couple of minutes". It works for Slashdot...
Don't say "we". I've been a slashdotter longer than most, and a sysadmin who codes for longer than many. Not only do I not play pretend games with my friends, but I also don't know a single programmer who plays those kinds of games. I know a few people who do, but they are universally *not* computer people - several would not even fall into the "more intelligent than average" group. Draw all the parallels you want, I'm not buying it. I think that the few who match posted, making a vocal minority appear much larger than it really is, and making all of those RPG people (who I don't have a problem with, but don't particularly like being lumped in with all the same) feel better in yet another imagined world.
All of the computer people I know of are into building physical things of some sort - I'm partial to cars. Someday I suppose I should post an ask slashdot about how the understanding teh inner workings of things, and all pursuits engineering appeal to programmers and creative types, maybe throwing in some ego stroking about how it takes someone really smart to do that stuff too. But then someone will point out all the Firebirds up on blocks in the trailer parks and how those dummies can work on cars, too. I'll ignore those people, because I want to imagine that I'm really smart because of my own hobby that the rest of the world thinks is a waste of time ("but the speed limit's still just 55").
I believe I laughed at 157HP out of a 2-bbl carb'd 302 cubic inches then, too. Just as a point of reference.:) Oh, and the turbo four-cylinder mustang GT in '83 and '84 really sucked, as well...
Of course, in 1982, you could also get the newly redesigned Camaro with a whopping 165HP, but it was also fuel injected (something the performance mustangs didn't get until the late 80's). So yeah, American cars generally were still suck-ass after the big gas crunch. Unless you count the turbo Buick T-type, which laid the ground work for the '84 to '87 Grand Nationals (which certainly *didn't* suck). Even in '82 the turbo T-type was pretty decent - and had a useful back seat.;)
It's clear enough in the description - is it that big of a deal for the people making the titles (often the submitter, AFAIK) to make a clear title too? Augh.
I refuse to support the phat noise (aka music keg) people. They either stole my idea, or independently invented it at the same time I was discussing it on Usenet. Either way, they won't share details of their system which was built on top of community-provided software which itself requires little to no modification, or the communication protocol between the receiver and a CD changer (which isn't exactly secret, but is a pain to extract). So screw them.:)
That doesn't get a "dual core" CPU that everyone seems to feel is the be-all, end-all in preformance now. Intel needed something for that particular hole in the market, and they needed it quick. They stumbled a bit on this one. Of course, no oher company who's led the game for decades has ever made a single sub-par product, eh? Look at The early 80's Ford Mustang, the Cadilac Catera, the Mercedes C230 Kompressor, etc for automotive examples, or look at most of Microsoft's products (maybe focus on Bob if a MS fanboy) for software example. Eh. Whoops.
I was going to say that it's actually a trailer, but with no hitch, it's nothing more than a cart or wagon. Sigh. I'm gonna start asking people where the company car is when I need to move heavier equipment around the building...
The submitting author said that it probably won't matter to those of us with 24x7 connectivity. So people like you and me, who have 24x7 connectivity over wireless already, clearly won't be affected by things like equipment changes or pricing. You ovbiously have nothing to worry about.:)
I remember when the album with "Cop Killer" came out, but I don't recall if I was able to drive at the time or not. That's probably why I didn't pick up a copy, and why I don't have a collection of 2 Live Crew albums. I wonder if I can still get that at K-Mart in the censored music section (yeah, the section isn't labeled as such - just like the music)...:)
I take the best of both worlds - spread the junk out on tables, sit outside and sell whatever sells, and then donate the rest. That way, I get some money now, and some later - rather than having to wait all the way to April...:)
These are the same local affiliates who refused my petitions to get a distant station on my satelite service, since I couldn't pick the station up with an antenna at my house anyway? The same ones who refused multiple petitions over a period of several years? Screw them and whatever their opinions might have been. The don't care about me, and the golden rule applies here.
You're right - it's the interface between the app and the server. Doh.:) Though, isn't the mod_* API more of a superset of CGI rather than a replacement? Trying to save a little face here...;)
That backup MX was also the primary DNS and syslog server, but that's not much of a load. The primary MX was also the pop/imap/web server, for what it's worth. My home setup is about 5 users with around 5-7K messages/day, and I run spamd and MySQL on the same box - which is a dual Celeron 400 machine. Messages come in on an AMD 5x86-133 gateway which does the DNS lookups and tehn forwards to a PPro233 which calls spamc (that one's also the web server). All three machines combined have less computing power than something you could buy for $500 now and have single hard drives (well, the ppro has an array of SCSI disks, but it doesn't count) - the two mail servers sit with triple 0.00, and the spamd box is at 0.09/0.02/0.01 right now. It still makes me wonder what the heck you're doing.:) I have the razor/dcc tests disabled, but otherwise it's pretty typical for a setup where all users access the same bayesian filter. If you put all of the config stuff into MySQL and run a modern MySQL with query caching, you can probably speed things up some, and you open up the potential of adding a second dedicated spamd box in a round-robin arrangement (or use any of the common connection balancing programs). I'm fairly agressive with filtering at the Postfix level too, though, so a lot of obvious junk gets filtered before it gets to SA - maybe that's part of it. I use header-checks and a couple of body-checks, but much of that really slows the 5x86 down...
That said, I'm gonna try dspam out tonight because it looks like it'll be easier to keep up-to-date than running sa-learn periodically, which I'm notoriously bad about.;)
Were you using procmail and individual spamassassins, or using spamd/spamc for mail checking? I wonder if that's the reason people see such super-high CPU loads with SA. I was delivering around 10K-15K messages/day (roughly 50 users), with SA identifying around 85% as spam. The backup MX ran spamd with user prefs and bayesian keys stored in MySQL, and the primary MX delivered through procmail using spamc. The backup MX/spamd machine was a P3/800 with 512M RAM and the primary MX was an Athlon 1000 with 1G. The load on both was almost never above 50%, and usually hovered around 10%.
Since you may have been serious - CGI stands for "Common Gateway Interface". In other words, CGI defines the "common" "interface" between the browser and the webserver (aka "gateway"). Many early CGI programs were written with perl, and several still are. I've written several CGI programs in C, PHP, perl, and bash - among others (Cold Fusion is something I'd like to forget - what a POS!). Using mod_blah generaly just moves the interpreter (or parts of it) into the web server so you save the launch time and can use nifty persistance stuff. None the less, you're still technically using CGI if you at any time submit data to a webserver using GET or POST. Yes, it's still cgi even if it's not handled by a perl script with a.cgi extension.
CGI's really a badly understood, oft misused term - and I've not explained it all that well - but hopefully the general idea's a little more clear.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Who do you think you are, anyway? It sounds like you think that those reps are supposed to be working for you or something. Geez. :)
It's KDE, not your memory usage. KDE out of the box is generally pretty darned slow. Ubuntu uses a pretty clean gnome install by default. Try installing KUbuntu (just apt-get kubuntu-desktop on your existing machine if you have a little free space and bandwidth). You'll get the option to either log in to KDE or Gnome in the "sessions" dialog on the login screen. KDE will probably feel slower, because it's a heavier desktop - but it's also a little more tightly integrated (for lack of a better description). Granted, SuSE tends to have an even heavier default, but most any default KDE will be kinda heavy all around because most of the time it's set to favor eye candy rather than performance.
:) Now if only they'd support the m68k target so I could run it on my presently NetBSD machines...
That said, I'm running Ubuntu on my wife's workstation, Gentoo on mine (will switch to Ubuntu eventually), Slackware on one server, Ubuntu on another, and SuSE 10 on still another. A couple of workstations netboot Ubuntu now, and I'm replacing a RedHat 9 machine with Ubuntu shortly. I always wanted to be a Debian snob, and Ubuntu's policy of releasing software versions that have been released in the most recent decade has finally made that viable.
Everyone already knows Microsoft development and administration. They teach it in third grade now - you must have been out of school after they implemented that policy.
Most people couldn't start up AutoCAD and draw a cube, let alone a house. Heck, even starting up AutoCAD at all can be a bit involved. That is the single worst interface *ever* (ignoring the list of just about every app written using Motif) - unless you spend a year or two of your life memorizing all of the command line stuff. It's like vi, except with the same concepts applied to toolbars and less general use.
Sorry, </rant>. I was trying to build some stuff (a desk) using 80/20 parts a while back, and ended up using AutoCAD (they provide an AutoCAD plugin that generates a bill of materials, etc) as a great way to waste weeks of my time rather than just drawing it out to scale on graph paper or something simple like that.
Why would you get a 'Vette when you could get a CTS-V (or even a "regular" STS) for similar money? You're still able to get .90G and a 4.8s 0-60 on the factory rolling stock, you've got a 'Vette underneath you (watch them being built while you tour the Corvette plant), and you get something where "fit and finish" or "I stopped at the store on the way home and bought more than just a gallon of milk" can be mentioned in a description which doesn't also involve [possibly stifled] laughter. And no one expects to have their ass handed to them by "Grandpa in his Caddy"... :)
Then there's that thing where 'Vette people frequently tend to be mostly pompous asses who are more concerned with preserving their "future classic" and telling people how expensive their car was rather than really enjoying the drive.
"Sorry, you are only allowed to post up to 10 URLs within a few minutes. You might be behind a firewall or proxy - please try again in a couple of minutes". It works for Slashdot...
Are you the same graphics designer who tried to tell me that dpi had nothing to do with digital image size and resolution?
Don't say "we". I've been a slashdotter longer than most, and a sysadmin who codes for longer than many. Not only do I not play pretend games with my friends, but I also don't know a single programmer who plays those kinds of games. I know a few people who do, but they are universally *not* computer people - several would not even fall into the "more intelligent than average" group. Draw all the parallels you want, I'm not buying it. I think that the few who match posted, making a vocal minority appear much larger than it really is, and making all of those RPG people (who I don't have a problem with, but don't particularly like being lumped in with all the same) feel better in yet another imagined world.
All of the computer people I know of are into building physical things of some sort - I'm partial to cars. Someday I suppose I should post an ask slashdot about how the understanding teh inner workings of things, and all pursuits engineering appeal to programmers and creative types, maybe throwing in some ego stroking about how it takes someone really smart to do that stuff too. But then someone will point out all the Firebirds up on blocks in the trailer parks and how those dummies can work on cars, too. I'll ignore those people, because I want to imagine that I'm really smart because of my own hobby that the rest of the world thinks is a waste of time ("but the speed limit's still just 55").
I believe I laughed at 157HP out of a 2-bbl carb'd 302 cubic inches then, too. Just as a point of reference. :) Oh, and the turbo four-cylinder mustang GT in '83 and '84 really sucked, as well...
;)
Of course, in 1982, you could also get the newly redesigned Camaro with a whopping 165HP, but it was also fuel injected (something the performance mustangs didn't get until the late 80's). So yeah, American cars generally were still suck-ass after the big gas crunch. Unless you count the turbo Buick T-type, which laid the ground work for the '84 to '87 Grand Nationals (which certainly *didn't* suck). Even in '82 the turbo T-type was pretty decent - and had a useful back seat.
It's clear enough in the description - is it that big of a deal for the people making the titles (often the submitter, AFAIK) to make a clear title too? Augh.
I refuse to support the phat noise (aka music keg) people. They either stole my idea, or independently invented it at the same time I was discussing it on Usenet. Either way, they won't share details of their system which was built on top of community-provided software which itself requires little to no modification, or the communication protocol between the receiver and a CD changer (which isn't exactly secret, but is a pain to extract). So screw them. :)
I dunno, there's good money in powder sales (according to my neighbor the convicted felon), and I've always wanted an early 70's Eldorado... :)
That doesn't get a "dual core" CPU that everyone seems to feel is the be-all, end-all in preformance now. Intel needed something for that particular hole in the market, and they needed it quick. They stumbled a bit on this one. Of course, no oher company who's led the game for decades has ever made a single sub-par product, eh? Look at The early 80's Ford Mustang, the Cadilac Catera, the Mercedes C230 Kompressor, etc for automotive examples, or look at most of Microsoft's products (maybe focus on Bob if a MS fanboy) for software example. Eh. Whoops.
I was going to say that it's actually a trailer, but with no hitch, it's nothing more than a cart or wagon. Sigh. I'm gonna start asking people where the company car is when I need to move heavier equipment around the building...
Maybe they should fax it, since faxes are legally binding and therefore must not be alterable. :/
The Discovery Channel apparently does. It's linked to by the submitter. :)
The submitting author said that it probably won't matter to those of us with 24x7 connectivity. So people like you and me, who have 24x7 connectivity over wireless already, clearly won't be affected by things like equipment changes or pricing. You ovbiously have nothing to worry about. :)
I remember when the album with "Cop Killer" came out, but I don't recall if I was able to drive at the time or not. That's probably why I didn't pick up a copy, and why I don't have a collection of 2 Live Crew albums. I wonder if I can still get that at K-Mart in the censored music section (yeah, the section isn't labeled as such - just like the music)... :)
I take the best of both worlds - spread the junk out on tables, sit outside and sell whatever sells, and then donate the rest. That way, I get some money now, and some later - rather than having to wait all the way to April... :)
Was that considered "Heavy Metal?" I thought it was rap...
These are the same local affiliates who refused my petitions to get a distant station on my satelite service, since I couldn't pick the station up with an antenna at my house anyway? The same ones who refused multiple petitions over a period of several years? Screw them and whatever their opinions might have been. The don't care about me, and the golden rule applies here.
You're right - it's the interface between the app and the server. Doh. :) Though, isn't the mod_* API more of a superset of CGI rather than a replacement? Trying to save a little face here... ;)
That backup MX was also the primary DNS and syslog server, but that's not much of a load. The primary MX was also the pop/imap/web server, for what it's worth. My home setup is about 5 users with around 5-7K messages/day, and I run spamd and MySQL on the same box - which is a dual Celeron 400 machine. Messages come in on an AMD 5x86-133 gateway which does the DNS lookups and tehn forwards to a PPro233 which calls spamc (that one's also the web server). All three machines combined have less computing power than something you could buy for $500 now and have single hard drives (well, the ppro has an array of SCSI disks, but it doesn't count) - the two mail servers sit with triple 0.00, and the spamd box is at 0.09/0.02/0.01 right now. It still makes me wonder what the heck you're doing. :) I have the razor/dcc tests disabled, but otherwise it's pretty typical for a setup where all users access the same bayesian filter. If you put all of the config stuff into MySQL and run a modern MySQL with query caching, you can probably speed things up some, and you open up the potential of adding a second dedicated spamd box in a round-robin arrangement (or use any of the common connection balancing programs). I'm fairly agressive with filtering at the Postfix level too, though, so a lot of obvious junk gets filtered before it gets to SA - maybe that's part of it. I use header-checks and a couple of body-checks, but much of that really slows the 5x86 down...
;)
That said, I'm gonna try dspam out tonight because it looks like it'll be easier to keep up-to-date than running sa-learn periodically, which I'm notoriously bad about.
Were you using procmail and individual spamassassins, or using spamd/spamc for mail checking? I wonder if that's the reason people see such super-high CPU loads with SA. I was delivering around 10K-15K messages/day (roughly 50 users), with SA identifying around 85% as spam. The backup MX ran spamd with user prefs and bayesian keys stored in MySQL, and the primary MX delivered through procmail using spamc. The backup MX/spamd machine was a P3/800 with 512M RAM and the primary MX was an Athlon 1000 with 1G. The load on both was almost never above 50%, and usually hovered around 10%.
Since you may have been serious - CGI stands for "Common Gateway Interface". In other words, CGI defines the "common" "interface" between the browser and the webserver (aka "gateway"). Many early CGI programs were written with perl, and several still are. I've written several CGI programs in C, PHP, perl, and bash - among others (Cold Fusion is something I'd like to forget - what a POS!). Using mod_blah generaly just moves the interpreter (or parts of it) into the web server so you save the launch time and can use nifty persistance stuff. None the less, you're still technically using CGI if you at any time submit data to a webserver using GET or POST. Yes, it's still cgi even if it's not handled by a perl script with a .cgi extension.
:)
CGI's really a badly understood, oft misused term - and I've not explained it all that well - but hopefully the general idea's a little more clear.