Well in Mrs. Bono's analogy it DRM would be having a speed limit and building cars that could not go faster then the speed limit, and where the car manufacture deciding when and where you could drive your car.
1. Linux maps treads to processes so you get a mass of processes anyway.
2. If you want to run things that are not tread safe like PHP you have to pre-fork. In fact PHP's web site states not to run PHP, Apache, and UNIX-like OS 2.x on any production web site. Beause most libs for are not thread safe. Which means mod_perl and mod_* are going to have the same problems. It may work it may not that is not what I want to base my job on.
3. Single process, single threaded web servers are nice for static content but not for most modern hign volumn web sites which have lots of dynamic parts.
Try this one www.mini-box.com
This power supply is designed for mini-itx has power brick, runs on 12v DC. It's small and depending on your itx motherboard it can plug right in with no cables.
Well I have done it I work for www.kgem.tv here in California. But I used tivoNet card and a NFS server that holds all our video files. Works great. But it takes over two times real time to get a program ready to playout beacuse you have to play in/record with the tivo then extract from the tivo into the server.
I have been thinking of using dv bridges as it would be real time to get shows ready to play. Or faster if it is coming off of a dv based non-leaner editing computer. All you lose is the overlay capability. Which is nice because we use it to do bug generation.
Re:Flavor- Who gives a F-ck. This is sick
on
Lab-Grown Steak
·
· Score: 1
That has always been my argument to people who say that it is wrong or mean to kill animals to eat. The fact is that people created cows/pigs/chickens. Those animals did not exist before people bred them into the things that we call cows/pigs/chickens.
Growing the meat alone is just another step forward.
You beat me to the two times what ever the estimate is rule. The only other part from TMMM is that the last 10% take longer then the first 90% so don't move up deadlines becuase it seems like things are "almost done".
These all seem like good resons not to ground the cable. If there are static discharge from bulk heads then just think of that discharge going into a NIC. Because I knew a guy that keep having NICs fail in a lab at the other end of the building. Turns out the thinnet was grounded in a couple of places and was up to 90v, and blowing up the transceivers. Run the cables in conduit and let that be the shield for long runs.
Got it in one. Just leave the output program running on all programs pointed at one box with reflector running. Then a little script that starts the mic program and points ether at a spacific other box or the reflector for all the boxes. Would work great for a LAN.
Don't run an application you don't "trust."
This isn't going to be a server - it's a desktop machine. As such I'll run a fair amount of stuff, some of it for fun, some to get a job done. It's not practical to skry the source, even it it's available: as you know, there have been a few Trojans imbedded in open source software recently which remained hidden for quite some time.
We Get that it is a Desktop Machine, still only run things that you trust. You just use a wider definition of trust. Trust that everything from your distro providers is ok. Use things that apear to be widely used, if you are paronoid do a google search to see if anyone has complained. Google searchs lots of mailing lists.
Other than that sense you do not want to use iptables on the client where it would be able to do what ZoneAlarm/BlackIce does. You can create a seperate acount to where the app will not be able to mess with things.
Iptables could be used to block everything to every port and then open the ports for app. that you want to have access.
Well you concern seems to be you can not do normal stuff with an SGI. So Linux would seem to be a better choice as you can do normal stuff with a Linux box(web browsing and email). Nvidia makes professional level agp card, with linux drivers, way more horse power than a Gefore 4, but much more expensive. One of the main reasons that the CGI house are going to Linux on the workstation is that they are cheap, compared to SGI machines. They can afford to replace them every Movie(ever 2-2.5 years) instaed of every two Movies(5-7 years) and the preformance growth curve over time for PC hareware is way steaper than for SGI hareware.
Have you tried changing your browser string so that Konqueror pretends to be say mozilla on x86 linux. And then seen if it will render yahoo mail. Or have you gone there and you gotten the your browser/platform not supported message. Because if you change your browser string and it works. Email them and tell them to not auto kick you because Konqueror/OZ romed Zauruses do work. Yahoo are freeBSD people so they may fix the problem.
Well it will because in the cable and DSL world you know from which cable or xDSL "modem", request is comming from. You do not do it by the MAC address of the ethernet card but from the MAC of the "modem" or the what ever it is called ATM address of the xDSL bridge.
Why not just have the DHCP server query the database directly then you NEVER have to restart that DHCP server. And you can make your customers feel great because there connection will start working while they are on the phone with tech support. Not "well it should be working within X minutes". Shouldn't your php front end do the error checking and tell the guy reading from the script(level 1 tech support) that the number he just entered it not a valid MAC address.
You probably could have fixed the problem by unplugging the cable modem. With the providers I have worked with it is not there equipment that is keeping you from connecting when you change cards it is the "modem". Unplug it and let it lose its settings and it works again as they "provision" by entering its MAC address in there system not the MAC address of the ethernet card. Because like you did you can change a MAC address in software. Some cable companies ask you to never unplug your cable "modem" because it has to download its firmware setings again every time you do so they put useless power buttons on they that don't get them to actually restart.
Ya, seems like the best solution would be to take one of the many open source DHCP servers out there and add a database layer to it to do a SQL query. I will suggust MySQL because they have good documentation and I have used it before, and it was dead simple. Then you can have an easy to use simple front end to change the mac addresses. Sense almost every programmming language has MySQL bindings. But how much are your mac addresses really changing? Don't you have some sort of ATM address for the DSL bridges, and all the cable modems I have seen have there own MAC addresses. So they should only be changing when the end user equipment changes.
Well Orcale released some patches for linux so that you could run a RAC cluster using ieee1394(firewire), thay say it is just for low cost testing. Ofcoarse firewire limits your disk throught put to 50 megabytes per second but if you are looking for Ultra cheap that is the way to go.
The answer is yes this is supported. Even with software RAID array of disks. This is what all the Linux High Availability stuff is all about. Meaning you could have a mirrored array of disks in case a disk fails and in case a server fails. Having the only single point of failure being the SCSI bus termination but auto self-termination might fix that. There was an as an AC already stated there was an article at
sysadmin journal [samag.com] about doing it with a single disk and using heartbeat. So all you realy need is a disk, cables, and a serial cross over cable between the two systems. Make sure to use a journaled file system to save on fscks.
Microsoft skipped 91 major version numbers from 3.11 to 95...and it *still* wasn't much of an upgrade.
I hope it was ment as a joke but. Windows 95 is actually Windows 4.00 if you look at the system dialog in the Control panel. Windows 98 is 4.10, I don't know what ME is but I would assume 4.2. Windows 2000 is the marketing name of windows NT 5.
I am hearing you. When I said that the files are locked at the application layer I ment that ether extended attributes, or lock files are used. The files are not really locked. This is already done some applications. You have to depend on a well behaved application. If you want to call that a filesystem you can but seems to fall below my definition of a filesystem.
There is a "server" but it is emulating a disk with a standard file system. Or with the lock deamon on the "server". You try to open a file that is already open for writing and it fails. I am reading a file, some other system trys to open it for writing it fails. You don't just open a file then decide what you are going to do with it. That is why the open function has arguments.
Now I never said it was easy(but you make it sound imposable) or that I was going to waste my time tring to do it. It is just that it is what I would like, and I am not the only one that wants something like this. But most of the Uber hackers out there today work for companies that want to make money off of the Big Boys and or people that can aford the current solutions not the little guys.
All good points execpt as I said earlier I want to use it for video, which is something that SAN is already used for. Files are locked at the application layer. Or an NFS style lock system could be used on the target side. All files being available all the time is not important. I do not need a general solution.
Actual it is what he is talking about see later post.
There is a standard for firewire disks sbp2. You implement that as the disk and not as the host.
> This issue is far more complex than you think it is. Well I think that it is very complex that is why I have not done it yet and selling TB ide arrays with a firewire ports that can be used as a SAN. > -- there would he serious cache coherency issues. How would you remotely invalidate a filesystem buffer cache, or a cached inode? There are patches by oracle to allow linux system to share a common firewire disk. How is it handled in a SAN normal envorment? Do it the same way. Big SAN arrays have internal cache so I think they like for the OSes to do as little cacheing as possible.
Running all at the same time that would be worth the hype. Seems easy thought, linux/UML(User mode Linux) with vmware, Replicate as need. Plus you could do it all with on big hard drive.
What he is talking about is SAN but using a linux box instead of embedded hardware. The linux box has a bunch of disk which it raids together and then acts as a big disk drive to the hosts on the other end of the firewire cable. The linux box would be a target mode firewire disk.
I want to do this as well, for a small network of video editing machines. But have not found any project beond to planning stage. It seem that anyone that needs to do SAN has a crap load of money to spend.
No you will see a pid per thread because, that is how the scheduler knows to schedule things. The getpid() c library call from within the program. When they said it is a 1-to-1 mapping that means that there is a process per thread. Just look when you see all those proccesses with the same name, and see if they have the exact same memory usage. If they do it means they are using the same memory and are threads. No matter how you implement threads there has to be more than one proccess other wise when the program blocks for I/O all threads would be blocked.
Slashdot Mirror
Well in Mrs. Bono's analogy it DRM would be having a speed limit and building cars that could not go faster then the speed limit, and where the car manufacture deciding when and where you could drive your car.
A lot of us already pay for unlimited data, or our jobs pay for it so that we can do your jobs from anywhere in an emergency.
If it is linux you are wrong in a couple of ways.
1. Linux maps treads to processes so you get a mass of processes anyway.
2. If you want to run things that are not tread safe like PHP you have to pre-fork. In fact PHP's web site states not to run PHP, Apache, and UNIX-like OS 2.x on any production web site. Beause most libs for are not thread safe. Which means mod_perl and mod_* are going to have the same problems. It may work it may not that is not what I want to base my job on.
3. Single process, single threaded web servers are nice for static content but not for most modern hign volumn web sites which have lots of dynamic parts.
Try this one www.mini-box.com
This power supply is designed for mini-itx has power brick, runs on 12v DC. It's small and depending on your itx motherboard it can plug right in with no cables.
Well I have done it I work for www.kgem.tv here in California. But I used tivoNet card and a NFS server that holds all our video files. Works great. But it takes over two times real time to get a program ready to playout beacuse you have to play in/record with the tivo then extract from the tivo into the server.
I have been thinking of using dv bridges as it would be real time to get shows ready to play. Or faster if it is coming off of a dv based non-leaner editing computer. All you lose is the overlay capability. Which is nice because we use it to do bug generation.
That has always been my argument to people who say that it is wrong or mean to kill animals to eat. The fact is that people created cows/pigs/chickens. Those animals did not exist before people bred them into the things that we call cows/pigs/chickens.
Growing the meat alone is just another step forward.
You beat me to the two times what ever the estimate is rule. The only other part from TMMM is that the last 10% take longer then the first 90% so don't move up deadlines becuase it seems like things are "almost done".
These all seem like good resons not to ground the cable. If there are static discharge from bulk heads then just think of that discharge going into a NIC. Because I knew a guy that keep having NICs fail in a lab at the other end of the building. Turns out the thinnet was grounded in a couple of places and was up to 90v, and blowing up the transceivers. Run the cables in conduit and let that be the shield for long runs.
Got it in one.
Just leave the output program running on all programs pointed at one box with reflector running. Then a little script that starts the mic program and points ether at a spacific other box or the reflector for all the boxes. Would work great for a LAN.
Other than that sense you do not want to use iptables on the client where it would be able to do what ZoneAlarm/BlackIce does. You can create a seperate acount to where the app will not be able to mess with things.
Iptables could be used to block everything to every port and then open the ports for app. that you want to have access.
Well you concern seems to be you can not do normal stuff with an SGI. So Linux would seem to be a better choice as you can do normal stuff with a Linux box(web browsing and email). Nvidia makes professional level agp card, with linux drivers, way more horse power than a Gefore 4, but much more expensive. One of the main reasons that the CGI house are going to Linux on the workstation is that they are cheap, compared to SGI machines. They can afford to replace them every Movie(ever 2-2.5 years) instaed of every two Movies(5-7 years) and the preformance growth curve over time for PC hareware is way steaper than for SGI hareware.
Have you tried changing your browser string so that Konqueror pretends to be say mozilla on x86 linux. And then seen if it will render yahoo mail. Or have you gone there and you gotten the your browser/platform not supported message. Because if you change your browser string and it works. Email them and tell them to not auto kick you because Konqueror/OZ romed Zauruses do work. Yahoo are freeBSD people so they may fix the problem.
Well it will because in the cable and DSL world you know from which cable or xDSL "modem", request is comming from. You do not do it by the MAC address of the ethernet card but from the MAC of the "modem" or the what ever it is called ATM address of the xDSL bridge.
Why not just have the DHCP server query the database directly then you NEVER have to restart that DHCP server. And you can make your customers feel great because there connection will start working while they are on the phone with tech support. Not "well it should be working within X minutes". Shouldn't your php front end do the error checking and tell the guy reading from the script(level 1 tech support) that the number he just entered it not a valid MAC address.
You probably could have fixed the problem by unplugging the cable modem. With the providers I have worked with it is not there equipment that is keeping you from connecting when you change cards it is the "modem". Unplug it and let it lose its settings and it works again as they "provision" by entering its MAC address in there system not the MAC address of the ethernet card. Because like you did you can change a MAC address in software. Some cable companies ask you to never unplug your cable "modem" because it has to download its firmware setings again every time you do so they put useless power buttons on they that don't get them to actually restart.
Ya, seems like the best solution would be to take one of the many open source DHCP servers out there and add a database layer to it to do a SQL query. I will suggust MySQL because they have good documentation and I have used it before, and it was dead simple. Then you can have an easy to use simple front end to change the mac addresses. Sense almost every programmming language has MySQL bindings. But how much are your mac addresses really changing? Don't you have some sort of ATM address for the DSL bridges, and all the cable modems I have seen have there own MAC addresses. So they should only be changing when the end user equipment changes.
Well Orcale released some patches for linux so that you could run a RAC cluster using ieee1394(firewire), thay say it is just for low cost testing. Ofcoarse firewire limits your disk throught put to 50 megabytes per second but if you are looking for Ultra cheap that is the way to go.
The answer is yes this is supported. Even with software RAID array of disks. This is what all the Linux High Availability stuff is all about. Meaning you could have a mirrored array of disks in case a disk fails and in case a server fails. Having the only single point of failure being the SCSI bus termination but auto self-termination might fix that. There was an as an AC already stated there was an article at sysadmin journal [samag.com] about doing it with a single disk and using heartbeat. So all you realy need is a disk, cables, and a serial cross over cable between the two systems. Make sure to use a journaled file system to save on fscks.
I hope it was ment as a joke but. Windows 95 is actually Windows 4.00 if you look at the system dialog in the Control panel. Windows 98 is 4.10, I don't know what ME is but I would assume 4.2. Windows 2000 is the marketing name of windows NT 5.
I am hearing you. When I said that the files are locked at the application layer I ment that ether extended attributes, or lock files are used. The files are not really locked. This is already done some applications. You have to depend on a well behaved application. If you want to call that a filesystem you can but seems to fall below my definition of a filesystem.
There is a "server" but it is emulating a disk with a standard file system.
Or with the lock deamon on the "server".
You try to open a file that is already open for writing and it fails. I am reading a file, some other system trys to open it for writing it fails.
You don't just open a file then decide what you are going to do with it. That is why the open function has arguments.
Now I never said it was easy(but you make it sound imposable) or that I was going to waste my time tring to do it. It is just that it is what I would like, and I am not the only one that wants something like this. But most of the Uber hackers out there today work for companies that want to make money off of the Big Boys and or people that can aford the current solutions not the little guys.
All good points execpt as I said earlier I want to use it for video, which is something that SAN is already used for. Files are locked at the application layer. Or an NFS style lock system could be used on the target side. All files being available all the time is not important. I do not need a general solution.
Actual it is what he is talking about see later post.
There is a standard for firewire disks sbp2. You implement that as the disk and not as the host.
> This issue is far more complex than you think it is.
Well I think that it is very complex that is why I have not done it yet and selling TB ide arrays with a firewire ports that can be used as a SAN.
> -- there would he serious cache coherency issues. How would you remotely invalidate a filesystem buffer cache, or a cached inode?
There are patches by oracle to allow linux system to share a common firewire disk. How is it handled in a SAN normal envorment? Do it the same way. Big SAN arrays have internal cache so I think they like for the OSes to do as little cacheing as possible.
Running all at the same time that would be worth the hype. Seems easy thought, linux/UML(User mode Linux) with vmware, Replicate as need. Plus you could do it all with on big hard drive.
What he is talking about is SAN but using a linux box instead of embedded hardware. The linux box has a bunch of disk which it raids together and then acts as a big disk drive to the hosts on the other end of the firewire cable. The linux box would be a target mode firewire disk.
I want to do this as well, for a small network of video editing machines. But have not found any project beond to planning stage. It seem that anyone that needs to do SAN has a crap load of money to spend.
No you will see a pid per thread because, that is how the scheduler knows to schedule things. The getpid() c library call from within the program. When they said it is a 1-to-1 mapping that means that there is a process per thread. Just look when you see all those proccesses with the same name, and see if they have the exact same memory usage. If they do it means they are using the same memory and are threads. No matter how you implement threads there has to be more than one proccess other wise when the program blocks for I/O all threads would be blocked.