Why not make a few of the classes a requirement, not an elective.
I suspect you may be able to entice more young women into tech, if you expose them too it more.
If EVERYONE in your grade has to take a few of the basic computer science classes, you may find that more women get interested in the subject. Women who wouldn't, on their own, think to take the class.
That's why the redundancy design of disk arrays like IBM's XIV (and others) are so necessary with large SATA drives.
Rebuilding a single 8TB drive to another single 8TB drive in a raid array is dangerously slow (odds of a secondary failure are high). It will also have a long negative impact on array performance.
But if your rebuilding redundancy from a failed 8TB drive across a system containing say 72 of these drives with (at least) triple redundancy of any given extent, you'll be just fine and struggle to notice a performance hit.
Basically, large SATA drives don't belong in classic RAID designs. You want to massively distribute IO & redundancy to overcome the per disk bandwidth limitations.
"Tesla is getting legislated out of existence in most places."
Please explain.
The laws denying auto manufacturers from selling directly to consumers are ancient & GM blamed them too some degree for their bankruptcy back in 2008.
There are also laws forbidding movie studios from owning movie theaters, based on similar reasoning.
These aren't NEW, they aren't getting 'legislated out of existence' they failed to build a business model that fits the current laws. Either they modify their model & sign up dealers (boo!) or continue to fight this in court (hooray!).
Sears Holdings isn't a retail company, or an IT company, or a realistate company, they are a hedge fund trying to squeeze out all the possible paper value from their assets. So that they can eventually convince some other sucker to buy these assets.
This is a continuation of some rather silly decisions that they've been making for some time.
You'd be surprised at the scale of their IT organization (as someone who once worked in Ford's datacenter).
They already have their own 'internal cloud' and have for some time (before 'cloud' was a 'thing'). The only thing different here is internal provisioning processes vs. Amazons credit card & go plan.
The cost of Amazon doesn't make sense, when you already have a pair of tier 1 datacenters and an IT organization more then capable of maintaining it.
Ford already HAS servers that won't be 'clouded' any time soon, so they have every bit as much justification to keep on doing things internally as Amazon would. And doing things for themselves gives them more control & likely better costs.
Possible, but still unlikely: unless your doing odd workloads or crazy overloading your host servers.
Most SANs are themselves rather oversubscribed, go look at the fan in ratio of your disk array. This is honestly what makes a SAN viable, otherwise you'd just plug all your servers directly into the disk array.
Disk IO tends to be bursty, which lends itself well to over subscription at the network layer.
In most cases, it's the spinning disk that is the physical bottleneck.
As a storage admin, I gotta say this is usually not the case in my experience.
Most 'busy' databases are either not as busy as the app folk think, or the bottlenecks tend to be inside the server/app not the spinning disk itself.
If you really DO actually need dedicated spindles for a database or two, you can still accomplish this under VMWare, thus making the entire point moot.
You can toss app owner in their if you want, I wouldn't though.
I've worked at places that stick strictly to a functional naming scheme & those that used comic book characters and the like.
I gotta say, the silly comic book character names function to keep new hires less valuable for longer. It's confusing to everyone but they guy who's been there since they where built. Then again, keep in mind I've only really worked in datacenteres of fortune 50 sized companies, SMB systems might be easier to track w/silly names.
" Like the applications menu. You click on a category and the menu stays the same size and the icons are replaced by the icons of the category you've selected."
You do know you can change this behavior don't you? Right click on the menu button "switch to classic menu style" bam!
I also hate that default slideing menu system, so I change it.
Thats one of the best features of KDE is it's customization.
Honestly I don't care what they do except for eliminating junk mail. I'm lucky if I get ONE piece of valid mail a month, yet my mabox is full every day.... and yes iv opted out at every opportunity I can find. I loath the uspo because all they seem to do is deliver trash to my door and in it hide my water bill n occasional government notices.
The roku box may cost $99, hey I don't even need it as I've already got a Wii. However the added equipment required to cleanly integrate either of these into my whole house distribution system EASILY doubles that cost. I already have a full featured Linux HTPC that can be viewed or controlled from nearly any room in my home. Netflix simply refuses to integrate into my existing setup for a reasonable cost therefore I refuse to fund them.
Ok, wow. DS9 would probably be the BEST of the set. Enterprise earns an honorable mention as the basted child of DS9 & TOS. It is clearly VOYAGER that is the worst of the series, but even VOY had a few redeeming qualities (and I'm not talking 7of9, she was one of the reasons I DISliked that show).
Personaly: I was protesting THE WAR IN IRAQ. The war in Afghanistan has some relationship to the attacks on 9/11. The war in Iraq was foist upon us because they finally had the chance to get away with it by implying a relationship to 9/11 (with no proof). The war in Afghanastan was COMPLETLY mismanaged becouse it was back burnered to an unnecisary war in Iraq.... maybe it's not a Republicrat vs Democrin argument, I hate both Kodos AND Krang, maybe some of us think for ourselves.
Was the Afghan war necessary, that's debatable. Was it justified, I think it clearly was.Neither can be said for Iraq./end Troll feeding
I'm a storage administrator, and I'll be the first to tell you the application knowledge rarely falls down to my level. When it does, half the time it's pure crap. The other half, we can architect something intelligent & I go home feeling good.
That being said: Being on the other side of that wall, I do get fed up with the "I can just buy a bunch of disk, slap it in a server & call it a disk array" game. The software for redundancy on the level of quality of the crappiest clarrion array with dual SPs is just not there (it will be soon I think). Also, at a large enough scale, putting the slow IO bulk storage on the 'big expensive SAN disk' does make sense, in that you can use capacity on disks that may be near the IO limit but barely touched on capacity. This -CAN- cost less then buying/supporting another subsystem (like netapp). Most large companies have no way to charge you less for the lower IO profile though, as they just kick back the purchase price by GB:-( so you are subsidizing the IO of some IO hog, the company however, isn't spending more money to do this.
The real problems are 1) bean counters who are totally lost, but think they aren't. 2) application & server people who don't understand storage*, but think they do. 3) storage people who don't understand the app, but think they do.
you find the solution to THOSE 3 issues & you can write your own ticket!
(* most times the 'app people', don't even understand the shrink wrapped app they just purchased & the vendor IO profile is a crazy over estimated CYA)
Your dead on. Fibre channel drives are dead, they will cease to exist in the near/medium term future. SAS & SATA will live on. Fibre Channel as a transport (i.e. SANS) will be dead in the medium to long term future, giving way to the expansion of 10Gb CEE (maybe holding on in FCoE for a while).
The problem in 'the enterprise' is not the ability to find the different technologies (SSD, FC, SAS, SATA) for your workloads... the problem is finding which workload belongs on which of your technologes. Every application vendor & DBA I've ever dealt with wants raid 10 for everything, and in a shared SAN environment, in most cases it's unnecisary and in some cases it's counterproductive.
What we're seeing from some of the enterprise hardware vendors is two fold. a) using SSDs in the disk subsystem as a form of second stage cache for cache friendly workloads and b) intelligently reviewing every block by use and moving each block to the appropriate technology (SSD, Sata, FC, etc) to best service IO. Sounds promising, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Getting business & application folk to 'classify' there data for IO usage & throughput, especially before they've installed or written the app, is like herding rabid cats. So you'll end up buying SSDs for an app that will never leverage them or SATA for an app that needs SSDs, depending on what budget these folk could justify to there PHBs.
No way dude, that's a fake.... the REAL one is downtown Detroit right across the street from the Joe Lewis fist & a block or so from the Windsor tunnel.
FCoE does not allow you (yet) to ditch the fibre channel network. Very few (if any?) storage vendors are shipping native FCoE storage devices, right now your looking at iSCSI (worst of both worlds) or native FC. I wouldn't really trust FCoE for a large SAN without a CEE ('datacenter Ethernet') based LAN (lossless, in order 10Gb Ethernet standard, basicly the best of Ethernet & FC merged).
The real problem with FCoE (& FC in general) is that it is a notoriously misbehaved technology when doing vendor interop. So basicly Cisco is using it's ethernet dominance to push what should fundamentally be a better solution (one network for all) in order to push out the market leader in the FC space (Brocade/McData). For the near/medium term your going to need a FC storage core for you legacy storage devices & your NOT going to plug a Brocade SAN into a Nexus & get good results..... basicly, I hope you either don't have a legacy SAN environment or you have MDS switches in it already if you want to go that route any time soon.
Don't get me started on the silly political fallout of merging a network & SAN team in a large organization:-( (hint: the SAN team will lose as there are less of us)
By the way, anybody want to hire a SAN guy with ~7 years experience who's drooling for some IP and/or VMWare experience ?;-) Something tells me the value of my current skill set is about to expire.
What you described is maybe half of the job (and in my opinion not the fun half). The other half is the constant churn of hardware/software upgrades. In a large enough datacenter there's always new equipment coming in and old going out, and those projects can be challanging & fun. I.e. replacing all the switches in a SAN, installing new bladecenters & migrating apps over, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not make a few of the classes a requirement, not an elective.
I suspect you may be able to entice more young women into tech, if you expose them too it more.
If EVERYONE in your grade has to take a few of the basic computer science classes, you may find that more women get interested in the subject. Women who wouldn't, on their own, think to take the class.
That's why the redundancy design of disk arrays like IBM's XIV (and others) are so necessary with large SATA drives.
Rebuilding a single 8TB drive to another single 8TB drive in a raid array is dangerously slow (odds of a secondary failure are high). It will also have a long negative impact on array performance.
But if your rebuilding redundancy from a failed 8TB drive across a system containing say 72 of these drives with (at least) triple redundancy of any given extent, you'll be just fine and struggle to notice a performance hit.
Basically, large SATA drives don't belong in classic RAID designs. You want to massively distribute IO & redundancy to overcome the per disk bandwidth limitations.
"Tesla is getting legislated out of existence in most places."
Please explain.
The laws denying auto manufacturers from selling directly to consumers are ancient & GM blamed them too some degree for their bankruptcy back in 2008.
There are also laws forbidding movie studios from owning movie theaters, based on similar reasoning.
These aren't NEW, they aren't getting 'legislated out of existence' they failed to build a business model that fits the current laws. Either they modify their model & sign up dealers (boo!) or continue to fight this in court (hooray!).
Sears Holdings isn't a retail company, or an IT company, or a realistate company, they are a hedge fund trying to squeeze out all the possible paper value from their assets. So that they can eventually convince some other sucker to buy these assets.
This is a continuation of some rather silly decisions that they've been making for some time.
Regarding Ford specifically.
You'd be surprised at the scale of their IT organization (as someone who once worked in Ford's datacenter).
They already have their own 'internal cloud' and have for some time (before 'cloud' was a 'thing'). The only thing different here is internal provisioning processes vs. Amazons credit card & go plan.
The cost of Amazon doesn't make sense, when you already have a pair of tier 1 datacenters and an IT organization more then capable of maintaining it.
Ford already HAS servers that won't be 'clouded' any time soon, so they have every bit as much justification to keep on doing things internally as Amazon would. And doing things for themselves gives them more control & likely better costs.
Is that a limitation of the PVR API, or the PVR plugin your using?
If it's available within the API, then I'd wager it's coming sooner rather then later, if the plugin is actively maintained.
That's the beauty of implementing the backend client in a plugin, they can be updated far more regularly then XBMC proper.
Possible, but still unlikely: unless your doing odd workloads or crazy overloading your host servers.
Most SANs are themselves rather oversubscribed, go look at the fan in ratio of your disk array. This is honestly what makes a SAN viable, otherwise you'd just plug all your servers directly into the disk array.
Disk IO tends to be bursty, which lends itself well to over subscription at the network layer.
In most cases, it's the spinning disk that is the physical bottleneck.
As a storage admin, I gotta say this is usually not the case in my experience.
Most 'busy' databases are either not as busy as the app folk think, or the bottlenecks tend to be inside the server/app not the spinning disk itself.
If you really DO actually need dedicated spindles for a database or two, you can still accomplish this under VMWare, thus making the entire point moot.
Ok,
W T F ?!?!?!
Why are we segregating content, why the horrific site redesign apparently inspired by the gawker media atrocity from last year?
I love this place, been here for over a decade, but this.... this....obvious shark jumping.
I don't know if I'll be coming back, I do know that I've lost faith.
Slashdot.org was a leader in the blog space, now they are desperately following. Be a leader again, not a follower.
I'm out.
That would get a generic "infastructure" name.
[datacenter][IS][number][letter if clustered]
You can toss app owner in their if you want, I wouldn't though.
I've worked at places that stick strictly to a functional naming scheme & those that used comic book characters and the like.
I gotta say, the silly comic book character names function to keep new hires less valuable for longer. It's confusing to everyone but they guy who's been there since they where built. Then again, keep in mind I've only really worked in datacenteres of fortune 50 sized companies, SMB systems might be easier to track w/silly names.
OP is very light on detail about what type of job he's even looking for.
Is he a programmer, a system administrator?
What, prey tell, does OP want to be when he grows up?
These things are the FIRST questions we need answering, before we start looking at specific technologies (i.e. MS vs Open Source).
" Like the applications menu. You click on a category and the menu stays the same size and the icons are replaced by the icons of the category you've selected."
You do know you can change this behavior don't you? Right click on the menu button "switch to classic menu style" bam!
I also hate that default slideing menu system, so I change it.
Thats one of the best features of KDE is it's customization.
Honestly I don't care what they do except for eliminating junk mail. I'm lucky if I get ONE piece of valid mail a month, yet my mabox is full every day.... and yes iv opted out at every opportunity I can find. I loath the uspo because all they seem to do is deliver trash to my door and in it hide my water bill n occasional government notices.
The roku box may cost $99, hey I don't even need it as I've already got a Wii. However the added equipment required to cleanly integrate either of these into my whole house distribution system EASILY doubles that cost. I already have a full featured Linux HTPC that can be viewed or controlled from nearly any room in my home. Netflix simply refuses to integrate into my existing setup for a reasonable cost therefore I refuse to fund them.
Ok, wow. DS9 would probably be the BEST of the set. Enterprise earns an honorable mention as the basted child of DS9 & TOS. It is clearly VOYAGER that is the worst of the series, but even VOY had a few redeeming qualities (and I'm not talking 7of9, she was one of the reasons I DISliked that show).
FCoE...
A solution in search of a problem. 10GbE ethernet is really very nice. FC (and FCoE included) have a history of poor vender interop.
So by using FCoE you get the worst of both worlds, 10GbE with vendor lockin at the storage level....
So... NFS anyone (or I guess iScsi)?
Only time i've ever used FCoE was as a WAN tunnel link for asynch rep.... not seeing any other value for this anytime soon.
Personaly: I was protesting THE WAR IN IRAQ. The war in Afghanistan has some relationship to the attacks on 9/11. The war in Iraq was foist upon us because they finally had the chance to get away with it by implying a relationship to 9/11 (with no proof). The war in Afghanastan was COMPLETLY mismanaged becouse it was back burnered to an unnecisary war in Iraq.... maybe it's not a Republicrat vs Democrin argument, I hate both Kodos AND Krang, maybe some of us think for ourselves.
Was the Afghan war necessary, that's debatable. Was it justified, I think it clearly was.Neither can be said for Iraq. /end Troll feeding
I'm a storage administrator, and I'll be the first to tell you the application knowledge rarely falls down to my level. When it does, half the time it's pure crap. The other half, we can architect something intelligent & I go home feeling good.
That being said: :-( so you are subsidizing the IO of some IO hog, the company however, isn't spending more money to do this.
Being on the other side of that wall, I do get fed up with the "I can just buy a bunch of disk, slap it in a server & call it a disk array" game. The software for redundancy on the level of quality of the crappiest clarrion array with dual SPs is just not there (it will be soon I think). Also, at a large enough scale, putting the slow IO bulk storage on the 'big expensive SAN disk' does make sense, in that you can use capacity on disks that may be near the IO limit but barely touched on capacity. This -CAN- cost less then buying/supporting another subsystem (like netapp). Most large companies have no way to charge you less for the lower IO profile though, as they just kick back the purchase price by GB
The real problems are
1) bean counters who are totally lost, but think they aren't.
2) application & server people who don't understand storage*, but think they do.
3) storage people who don't understand the app, but think they do.
you find the solution to THOSE 3 issues & you can write your own ticket!
(* most times the 'app people', don't even understand the shrink wrapped app they just purchased & the vendor IO profile is a crazy over estimated CYA)
Roughly, the end of WWII. Or if you're lazy, we'll just call it 1950.
And here I was looking for the up button for the space elevator :-(
Your dead on. Fibre channel drives are dead, they will cease to exist in the near/medium term future. SAS & SATA will live on. Fibre Channel as a transport (i.e. SANS) will be dead in the medium to long term future, giving way to the expansion of 10Gb CEE (maybe holding on in FCoE for a while).
The problem in 'the enterprise' is not the ability to find the different technologies (SSD, FC, SAS, SATA) for your workloads... the problem is finding which workload belongs on which of your technologes. Every application vendor & DBA I've ever dealt with wants raid 10 for everything, and in a shared SAN environment, in most cases it's unnecisary and in some cases it's counterproductive.
What we're seeing from some of the enterprise hardware vendors is two fold. a) using SSDs in the disk subsystem as a form of second stage cache for cache friendly workloads and b) intelligently reviewing every block by use and moving each block to the appropriate technology (SSD, Sata, FC, etc) to best service IO. Sounds promising, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Getting business & application folk to 'classify' there data for IO usage & throughput, especially before they've installed or written the app, is like herding rabid cats. So you'll end up buying SSDs for an app that will never leverage them or SATA for an app that needs SSDs, depending on what budget these folk could justify to there PHBs.
No way dude, that's a fake.... the REAL one is downtown Detroit right across the street from the Joe Lewis fist & a block or so from the Windsor tunnel.
http://tiny.cc/8mI9l
I mean, NOBODY'S gonna look for the Stargate in downtown Detroit. And if the aliens come through, they'll see Detroit & leave post haste.
Perfect plan.
FCoE does not allow you (yet) to ditch the fibre channel network. Very few (if any?) storage vendors are shipping native FCoE storage devices, right now your looking at iSCSI (worst of both worlds) or native FC. I wouldn't really trust FCoE for a large SAN without a CEE ('datacenter Ethernet') based LAN (lossless, in order 10Gb Ethernet standard, basicly the best of Ethernet & FC merged).
The real problem with FCoE (& FC in general) is that it is a notoriously misbehaved technology when doing vendor interop. So basicly Cisco is using it's ethernet dominance to push what should fundamentally be a better solution (one network for all) in order to push out the market leader in the FC space (Brocade/McData). For the near/medium term your going to need a FC storage core for you legacy storage devices & your NOT going to plug a Brocade SAN into a Nexus & get good results..... basicly, I hope you either don't have a legacy SAN environment or you have MDS switches in it already if you want to go that route any time soon.
Don't get me started on the silly political fallout of merging a network & SAN team in a large organization :-( (hint: the SAN team will lose as there are less of us)
By the way, anybody want to hire a SAN guy with ~7 years experience who's drooling for some IP and/or VMWare experience ? ;-) Something tells me the value of my current skill set is about to expire.
What you described is maybe half of the job (and in my opinion not the fun half). The other half is the constant churn of hardware/software upgrades. In a large enough datacenter there's always new equipment coming in and old going out, and those projects can be challanging & fun. I.e. replacing all the switches in a SAN, installing new bladecenters & migrating apps over, etc.
Somebody mod this guy up, that's hilarious.
say 2012 or so, you might be right, but right now.... not ready yet.