I set up only 1 site with Joomla in order to try it. I guess it is OK if your site doesn't have sensitive data and that you do not mind having your site defaced once in a while;-))
I had the admin password changed by a remote attacker on the Joomla site. The attacker couldn't deface the site although because I filtered admin access at the reverse-proxy level, thanks god;-))
Anyway, I wouldn't use Joomla for any sensitive site and I am tempted to say the same about PHP. I figure that it should be possible to write PHP in a secure way but I haven't seen it yet. Default session handling is a joke in PHP with files in the/tmp directory (session hijacking). There is also many other aspects that are handled in a way that often makes me smile;-))
I use bc and I like better than any GUI based calculator. Compiled with readline functionality, it just rocks in my humble opinion:
~$ bc bc 1.06 Copyright 1991-1994, 1997, 1998, 2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. For details type `warranty'. scale=5 (2*80/3.333)^3 110625.18091 ((2*80/3.333)^3)/21 5267.86575
> So the newspapers are finally realizing what Slashdotters have known for 10 years -- nobody RTFA
The only problems with this if that, like on Slashdot, the titles are sometimes misleading. It occurred to me several times that I found points in the article that contradicted the newspaper title;-)
In newspapers, the title is often chosen by another person than the writer, mostly for marketing reasons I would assume.
So in the end, we end up with people being misinformed on some topics;-(
At least/. got a lot of comments which usually contribute to fix misleading titles for people who do not read the TFA.;-)
Hehe, sorry, my fault. I used "many" to mean "more than one" and that was a mistake. After reviewing the English dictionary, it seems that in English, "more than one" is expressed by "several". I used to think that they were almost synonyms but "many" means more "a lot" than "several".
My God, how many times must I have sounded like bullshitting before;-))
Again, my mistake, I even learned the real signification of the word "many" today !!;-))/. teaches me all kind of stuff, including getting better in English;-)
> I have been using SuSE Linux 64 since 2005 with no problems.
Patrick Volkerding has just released the first version of Slackware 64 bits about 5 months ago and it doesn't seem to have had any impacts on the perception Slackware users have;-))
Granted, there was unofficial ports before that;-))
Thanks for letting me know it is stable on your side although;-)
> Whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, or vice versa, depends on the code.
That is exactly what I had figured out by intuition I guess;-))
I have learned (or got refreshed on?) some logical explanations to this fact here today, thanks to you and some others.
I have to admit that I don't remember taking the time to evaluate 32 bits vs 64 bits advantages, just postponing that analysis and an eventual upgrade to later. I though I was past due on that matter but with what I have read today, I will postpone my upgrade for another 2 or 3 years. Ah, problems quickly solved, I like this.
Yet, I think some people might be under the impression that 64 bits performs way better than it actually does, like say, up to twice as fast;-) This was almost the case when we went from 8 bits to 16 bits for obvious reasons like a few applications used only bytes (8 bits) in their code. Most of them were using types that typically require more than 8 bits, almost doubling the time to store/compute on 16 bits types on a 8 bit machine.
This brings an interesting point: Will 64 bits architectures be "enough for everybody" ? Will there ever be a point where we might want to go 128 bits or above ?
Before seeing this benchmark I took for granted that 64 bits would be faster or at least come to par in all tests. How do you explain that 32 bits is faster in some tests ?
The only way I can explain it is that some piece of code is not optimized yet to run on 64 bits. This kind of prove my impression right; I can still wait for a while before upgrading to 64 bits OSes. The overall performance gain might or might not be there depending on your use cases.
Of course, I will upgrade to 64 bits some day. Stability is also so a major concern and often, newer equals less stable or at least a new set of problems to troubleshoot.
From the Linux only perspective, I am still running everything (servers, desktop, laptop) on Linux 32 bits even on 64 bits machine because I figured that running 64 bits wasn't really worth yet.
Now, I am really surprised to see that Debian Linux 32 bits is actually faster than Debian Linux 64 bits in many tests !
Still, at that height, the rope would have to cross multiple satellite orbits. Given the required strength of the rope, how long would it be before it caused problems like satellite crashes and/or even cause the rope to break although it would need to be pretty strong ?
Maybe it would be possible to compute a safe location for the rope anchor, I have no idea of the odds but it would need to be taken into consideration.
I am very familiar with transactional behavior with regards to disk writes and journals. I have learned this many years ago while studying how database journaling works.
I also had to manually answer e2fsck question on system crash and evaluate the damage afterward in our early days so I understand what you are saying. We don't have to do this anymore, We just restore from a consistent image.
Most of our critical (if nott all) data is in the database, which is failover and redundant.
I guess I was trying to say that several layers of journaling was useless in our use case.
Maybe it is the same for Google. There will come a day when we will upgrade too, but the main cause might be lack of updates for ext2, not the need for a journaling file system.
Journaling file systems are great for laptops and desktops. Then again, there has been talks for a while about merging the database functionality into the file system. Obviously we would then need a journaling file system. Until we stop using relational databases to replace it with functionality implemented at the file system level, it always seemed to me that a journaling file system was duplication of functionality that wasn't required for our use case.
The "wait until stable before jumping into the band wagon" principle was also applied in our case. Maybe it was the same for Google. Nevertheless, Google's move would be a good indication that ext4 file system drivers are ready for a try !;-))
I have all my wireless IP addresses on a different subnet. The wireless router connects directly into the Linux router with its own interface. Thus it is easy to setup firewall rules specific to the wireless network and to monitor it for bandwidth usage and what not. Then connect your linux router to the ISP link.
To provide even more monitoring and trafic control capabilities from the Linux router, I do not use the DHCP server in the router but instead, wireless machines query the DHCP server on the Linux server.
All the required programs to accomplish this already come with most Linux distributions.
Slashdot Mirror
> and being easy to find code to copy.
Some use Joomla for the same reasons...
I set up only 1 site with Joomla in order to try it. I guess it is OK if your site doesn't have sensitive data and that you do not mind having your site defaced once in a while ;-))
I had the admin password changed by a remote attacker on the Joomla site. The attacker couldn't deface the site although because I filtered admin access at the reverse-proxy level, thanks god ;-))
Anyway, I wouldn't use Joomla for any sensitive site and I am tempted to say the same about PHP. I figure that it should be possible to write PHP in a secure way but I haven't seen it yet. Default session handling is a joke in PHP with files in the /tmp directory (session hijacking). There is also many other aspects that are handled in a way that often makes me smile ;-))
I forgot to mention that I use it in scripts too:
~$ (echo scale=5 ; echo 22/7) | bc
3.14285
~$
I use bc and I like better than any GUI based calculator. Compiled with readline functionality, it just rocks in my humble opinion:
~$ bc
bc 1.06
Copyright 1991-1994, 1997, 1998, 2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
For details type `warranty'.
scale=5
(2*80/3.333)^3
110625.18091
((2*80/3.333)^3)/21
5267.86575
man bc for details
Thanks ;-)
> PS: and it's just like you furriners
Hey I am not a furriners ! ;-)
My ancestors were in North America probably long before yours or at least before the ones of most Americans were! ;-)
Granted, English ain't my first language although. This doesn't constitute a valid excuse although and I don't try to use that fact as an excuse ;-))
I was merely admitting that I still do mistakes that seem obvious to the rest of the /. community and I actually enjoy being corrected ;-))
Thanks a lot or many thanks or several thanks which ever is the best ;-)
> Nope. "More than one" means "more than one", and it is a common figure of speech. "Several" means "enough to be worth mentioning."
OK, about "a few" then instead of "more than one" ? ;-))
> so the only advantage of a 128-bit architecture would be for
supporting the full length of a message on /. ?? ;-))
Thanks for your reply anyway,
Cheers,
> So the newspapers are finally realizing what Slashdotters have known for 10 years -- nobody RTFA
The only problems with this if that, like on Slashdot, the titles are sometimes misleading. It occurred to me several times that I found points in the article that contradicted the newspaper title ;-)
In newspapers, the title is often chosen by another person than the writer, mostly for marketing reasons I would assume.
So in the end, we end up with people being misinformed on some topics ;-(
At least /. got a lot of comments which usually contribute to fix misleading titles for people who do not read the TFA. ;-)
Hehe, sorry, my fault. I used "many" to mean "more than one" and that was a mistake. After reviewing the English dictionary, it seems that in English, "more than one" is expressed by "several". I used to think that they were almost synonyms but "many" means more "a lot" than "several".
My God, how many times must I have sounded like bullshitting before ;-))
Again, my mistake, I even learned the real signification of the word "many" today !! ;-)) /. teaches me all kind of stuff, including getting better in English ;-)
Cheers,
> Because every 64-Bit CPU I've ever used always had more than twice as much L2 cache as 32-bit Systems.
I am glad I am using 64 bits CPUs to run my 32 bits OSes then ;-)
Well unless somehow, the "twice as much" doesn't get used with 32 bits OSes running...
What do you think ?
> I have been using SuSE Linux 64 since 2005 with no problems.
Patrick Volkerding has just released the first version of Slackware 64 bits about 5 months ago and it doesn't seem to have had any impacts on the perception Slackware users have ;-))
Granted, there was unofficial ports before that ;-))
Thanks for letting me know it is stable on your side although ;-)
> Whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, or vice versa, depends on the code.
That is exactly what I had figured out by intuition I guess ;-))
I have learned (or got refreshed on?) some logical explanations to this fact here today, thanks to you and some others.
I have to admit that I don't remember taking the time to evaluate 32 bits vs 64 bits advantages, just postponing that analysis and an eventual upgrade to later. I though I was past due on that matter but with what I have read today, I will postpone my upgrade for another 2 or 3 years. Ah, problems quickly solved, I like this.
Yet, I think some people might be under the impression that 64 bits performs way better than it actually does, like say, up to twice as fast ;-) This was almost the case when we went from 8 bits to 16 bits for obvious reasons like a few applications used only bytes (8 bits) in their code. Most of them were using types that typically require more than 8 bits, almost doubling the time to store/compute on 16 bits types on a 8 bit machine.
This brings an interesting point: Will 64 bits architectures be "enough for everybody" ?
Will there ever be a point where we might want to go 128 bits or above ?
Thanks for your reply,
> 64 bit pointers are obviously larger too, so the 32 bit version has effectively more memory and better cache usage.
Very good point ;-))
Before seeing this benchmark I took for granted that 64 bits would be faster or at least come to par in all tests. How do you explain that 32 bits is faster in some tests ?
The only way I can explain it is that some piece of code is not optimized yet to run on 64 bits. This kind of prove my impression right; I can still wait for a while before upgrading to 64 bits OSes. The overall performance
gain might or might not be there depending on your use cases.
Of course, I will upgrade to 64 bits some day. Stability is also so a major concern and often, newer equals less stable or at least a new set of problems to troubleshoot.
From the Linux only perspective, I am still running everything (servers, desktop, laptop) on Linux 32 bits even on 64 bits machine because I figured that running 64 bits wasn't really worth yet.
Now, I am really surprised to see that Debian Linux 32 bits is actually faster than Debian Linux 64 bits in many tests !
A quick visit later, it seems to work fine in firefox...
Still, at that height, the rope would have to cross multiple satellite orbits. Given the required strength of the rope, how long would it be before it caused problems like satellite crashes and/or even cause the rope to break although it would need to be pretty strong ?
Maybe it would be possible to compute a safe location for the rope anchor, I have no idea of the odds but it would need to be taken into consideration.
> do that is to tow an asteroid into Earth orbit.
Wouldn't the asteroid (or anything for that matter) have to be on a geostationary orbit ?
This at 36,000 km from Earth without regards for the mass of the object. In contrast, ISS orbit is only at around 340 km.
36,000 km would be a very long piece of rope. Heck the moon is "only" at 384,403 km ! ;-)
Congratulations for your introduction to statistic 101 ! ;-)
Life is what you want it to be, no lies this time.
blah, blah, that was just a typo.
Go fuck yourself !
Cheers,
I am very familiar with transactional behavior with regards to disk writes and journals. I have learned this many years ago while studying how database journaling works.
I also had to manually answer e2fsck question on system crash and evaluate the damage afterward in our early days so I understand what you are saying. We don't have to do this anymore, We just restore from a consistent image.
Most of our critical (if nott all) data is in the database, which is failover and redundant.
I guess I was trying to say that several layers of journaling was useless in our use case.
Maybe it is the same for Google. There will come a day when we will upgrade too, but the main cause might be lack of updates for ext2, not the need for a journaling file system.
Journaling file systems are great for laptops and desktops. Then again, there has been talks for a while about merging the database functionality into the file system. Obviously we would then need a journaling file system. Until we stop using relational databases to replace it with functionality implemented at the file system level, it always seemed to me that a journaling file system was duplication of functionality that wasn't required for our use case.
The "wait until stable before jumping into the band wagon" principle was also applied in our case. Maybe it was the same for Google. Nevertheless, Google's move would be a good indication that ext4 file system drivers are ready for a try ! ;-))
OpenBSD packet filter supports transparent router redundancy pretty well I think. Used by pretty large corporations.
I have all my wireless IP addresses on a different subnet. The wireless router connects directly into the Linux router with its own interface. Thus it is easy to setup firewall rules specific to the wireless network and to monitor it for bandwidth usage and what not. Then connect your linux router to the ISP link.
To provide even more monitoring and trafic control capabilities from the Linux router, I do not use the DHCP server in the router but instead, wireless machines query the DHCP server on the Linux server.
All the required programs to accomplish this already come with most Linux distributions.
The title in the question was asking for a Linux distro.
Anyway, you have proven me right, if you read my OP very carefully, it states:
> I bet some would recommend looking at OpenBSD or FreeBSD as well. ;-))