> Think back to when ST:TNG came out. It was slick to look at, but the stories were very tame and seemed to dwell heavily on gizmos and soap opera moments. Time did the show no favors.
I never followed TNG when it was on regularly, but on those rare occasions that they broadcast an episode nowadays, it looks wonderful in comparison to Voyger. And I hear that Voyger is wonderful in comparison to Enterprise.
> This will in no way deter "terrorists" form blowing up buildings. Imagine for a second that you plan to undertake such an assignment. Would you go to the target site and sit around for a while to let people know your intents?
Probably they will pick targets that they know are on camera, to maximize the shock value of their act.
> In fact, we should also have a network of cameras monitoring the interiors of police stations, so that we (their employers) can monitor their performance.
Shouldn't those cameras go in the doughnut shops instead?
Pace to those who have replied so far, but I was talking about a BoR for non cell phone users, e.g. a right to sit through a movie without hearing a vanity ringer and a loud conversation.
> Specifically, suppose I have one computer with 1GB of RAM and 1GB of swap, and another computer with 2GB of RAM and no swap. Under what circumstances will the first computer be any faster?
When the second one is still in its box at the computer store because you couldn't afford it.
Re: I'm curious how windows does it
on
Is Swap Necessary?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
This may be slightly off topic...
Running KDE 3.2.1 now, I notice it takes longer to open apps than it does in windows. Mozilla for example takes literally a few seconds longer to open each window than it did in windows. Another thing windows does is make it faster when you run an app right after you ran it then closed it. Say for example in windows I run mozilla, then close it, then open it. When it opens it the second time, it's almost instant. However in linux, it seems to take the same original amount of time to load it completely. I'm sure it has to do with an entirely different process of loading programs, but apps always seemed to open faster in windows than in linux, in my view.
Then again, graphics used to be in the NT kernel and that's what made it appear fast, but lead to a lot of problems and crashes, so maybe the longer load time is worth the wait when compared to a reboot.
Conventional wisdom is that Windows uses lots of hacks to make it "look" faster in the way you describe, without regard to the cost it imposes on other operations. I'm almost certain that XP keeps some applications in memory after you "exit" them. Sometimes I notice that something won't work after running certain big applications, suggesting that sufficient resources haven't been released. Also, sometimes a shutdown complains about an application that won't respond even after you've closed everything. I think they're hoaxoring people to think they got a fast system, when they're really just robbing Peter to pay Paul.
It depends entirely on your work habits (and your RAM). For my first several years I hardly used my Linux swap file at all. But my work habits have changed, and I now have a huge swap requirement.
Run gkrellm or some other monitor that shows your swap usage. It might be too late for your current system, but it will tell you whether to make a larger or smaller swap partition for your next one.
Re: Where many people miss the point...
on
Is Swap Necessary?
·
· Score: 1
> however in your case keeping 3 gigs of swap around just in case your system fails probably isnt worth it
It has been a while since I've priced disk drives, but last time I checked it only cost about $10 to go up to the +20GB larger size, so that 3GB swap file should cost him about $1.50.
I used to make that joke to VAX engineers when they came around to work on stuff, and they infallibly took the time to explain to me why it wasn't a good idea.
> Linux has two properties that make swap a good thing (TM).
A third: Linux is a powerful and stable tool that makes it possible to run a dozen virtual desktops and stay logged on for a year at a time. So if you're a power user who leaves scores of applications open indefinitely as part of your ongoing work, kick some of them out to swap and leave them there until you get back on that project.
I've added first one and then a second swap file, to quadruple the size of the swap partition I made when I installed my current system. My next system will have much more memory, but much more swap space as well. I'll just leave more and bigger programs open on more virtual desktops, and run less risk of The GIMP blowing up when I run a complex fu script on a big image.
> Mmm, the stability these days isn't a major problem anymore, sure.
Suppose your OS has a MTBF of 3 months. Now aggregate 1000 nodes running it... whoops, 11 failures per day.
Also, what if your MTBF requires weekly or even daily reboots?
What's the MTBReinstall for the most stable Windows variant out there? Will a 1000 node cluster require a full-time Reinstallation Engineer to kep it running?
After all these years and zillions of dollars of revenues, MS's common desktop OS isn't stable enough to use for a developers' platform even with daily boots. Are these people really going to produce something suitable for HPC?
Slashdot Mirror
> Regardless of his politics, the man is basically dishonest, so you are left with the task of trying to sort the bullshit from the truth.
Kinda like everyone in the Bush Administraton, who get to spin their version of things on the news every night.
> Australian Computer Museum Needs a Saviour
Have they asked Jesus for help?
> When, or if, you americans actually do adopt the metric system, it's spelled Metre..
That's probably why we haven't adopted it...
> Plumbing shop: As luck would have it, we do have some 101.6mm guttering that is exactly the same size.
I'm amused when I see a US product that says "One Gallon", and then gives the number of litres with five or six significant figures.
> Think back to when ST:TNG came out. It was slick to look at, but the stories were very tame and seemed to dwell heavily on gizmos and soap opera moments. Time did the show no favors.
I never followed TNG when it was on regularly, but on those rare occasions that they broadcast an episode nowadays, it looks wonderful in comparison to Voyger. And I hear that Voyger is wonderful in comparison to Enterprise.
Is there a trend here?
...is a doctor willing to say, "It's dead, Jim!"
> Those who fail to learn from history, are condemned to repeat it.
Same with government and algebra.
> This will in no way deter "terrorists" form blowing up buildings. Imagine for a second that you plan to undertake such an assignment. Would you go to the target site and sit around for a while to let people know your intents?
Probably they will pick targets that they know are on camera, to maximize the shock value of their act.
> In fact, we should also have a network of cameras monitoring the interiors of police stations, so that we (their employers) can monitor their performance.
Shouldn't those cameras go in the doughnut shops instead?
> Allowing religious institutions to skip taxes is in effect respecting an establishment of religion.
It also puts the government in the position of getting to decide what counts as a religion and what doesn't.
> Anyhow, I call this Kinkscape since I use KDE. You may know it as Ginkscape.
Lucas fans call it "Binkscape"
Hog farmers call it "Oinkscape"
Teletubbie fans call it "Tinkie-Winkscape"
etc.
He's welcome to send me all the free hardware he pleases.
Pace to those who have replied so far, but I was talking about a BoR for non cell phone users, e.g. a right to sit through a movie without hearing a vanity ringer and a loud conversation.
...a Bill of Rights for the rest of us?
> I was just looking for my black hole this morning. Thanks for the heads up
Is there a mod for "unfortunate choice of words"?
> Pan is an awesome program, but seriously...when it can single handedly use > 1GB of RAM just stealing divx rips...
Think of it as a sin tax.
> Specifically, suppose I have one computer with 1GB of RAM and 1GB of swap, and another computer with 2GB of RAM and no swap. Under what circumstances will the first computer be any faster?
When the second one is still in its box at the computer store because you couldn't afford it.
> I thought it was 2x RAM.
It depends entirely on your work habits (and your RAM). For my first several years I hardly used my Linux swap file at all. But my work habits have changed, and I now have a huge swap requirement.
Run gkrellm or some other monitor that shows your swap usage. It might be too late for your current system, but it will tell you whether to make a larger or smaller swap partition for your next one.
> however in your case keeping 3 gigs of swap around just in case your system fails probably isnt worth it
It has been a while since I've priced disk drives, but last time I checked it only cost about $10 to go up to the +20GB larger size, so that 3GB swap file should cost him about $1.50.
> You could make a big ramdisk and swap to that!
I used to make that joke to VAX engineers when they came around to work on stuff, and they infallibly took the time to explain to me why it wasn't a good idea.
> Linux has two properties that make swap a good thing (TM).
A third: Linux is a powerful and stable tool that makes it possible to run a dozen virtual desktops and stay logged on for a year at a time. So if you're a power user who leaves scores of applications open indefinitely as part of your ongoing work, kick some of them out to swap and leave them there until you get back on that project.
I've added first one and then a second swap file, to quadruple the size of the swap partition I made when I installed my current system. My next system will have much more memory, but much more swap space as well. I'll just leave more and bigger programs open on more virtual desktops, and run less risk of The GIMP blowing up when I run a complex fu script on a big image.
> Being a creationist, I still subscribe to the world wide flood as the reason dinosaurs are extinct.
Funny, my bible says Noah did save all the world's animal "kinds". Your notion doesn't fit the bible any more than it fits the evidence.
> Mmm, the stability these days isn't a major problem anymore, sure.
Suppose your OS has a MTBF of 3 months. Now aggregate 1000 nodes running it... whoops, 11 failures per day.
Also, what if your MTBF requires weekly or even daily reboots?
What's the MTBReinstall for the most stable Windows variant out there? Will a 1000 node cluster require a full-time Reinstallation Engineer to kep it running?
After all these years and zillions of dollars of revenues, MS's common desktop OS isn't stable enough to use for a developers' platform even with daily boots. Are these people really going to produce something suitable for HPC?
> All we need now is a BSOD
Beowulfed Screens Of Death?