uptime is a Resource Toolkit application for WinNT/2k/XP. The average machine does not have it. Heres a sample from a few of our servers:
[Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
D:\Documents and Settings\jpitts>uptime [W2kAdvSrv1] \\[W2kAdvSrv1] has been up for: 62 day(s), 19 hour(s), 51 minute(s), 37 second(s)
D:\Documents and Settings\jpitts>uptime [W2kAdvSrv2] \\[W2kAdvSrv2] has been up for: 62 day(s), 19 hour(s), 44 minute(s), 15 second(s)
D:\Documents and Settings\jpitts>uptime [W2kAdvSrv3] \\[W2kAdvSrv3] has been up for: 61 day(s), 1 hour(s), 6 minute(s), 24 second(s)
...obviously, this could be a fake....
Re:Completely Worthless Post....
on
Open Blade Servers?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
just to nitpick... After all, the reason for a dual processor is to gain more processing power and speed, but a dual processor 800 meg chip will not perform as well as a simple single processor 1600 mhz chip and is more complex to program for. Well, it depends. Well written web applications under a moderate to heavy load tend to perform better under the multi-processor configuration. More complex to program for? Yessss....scalability often is.
free-as-in-beer (as opposed to free-as-in-speech) refers to the cost. It's free!
Free-as-in-speech refers to the EULA. Some Free-as-in-speech EULAs include the GPL, the BSD license, and the MPL. These licenses vary in their degree of freedom granted to the end-user, but are generally considered free, especially compared to EULAs tied to many commercial products.
Minus good reflection features, it's rather similiar to Java and C#, actually. Anders Hejlsberg, the original architect of Object Pascal, led the design team that created C#. I work with a lot of different languages on a regular basis, and OP/Delphi is one of my favorite. YMMV. IAAPP.
1. According to Borland, the name of the language is now simply "Delphi." This changed as of the release of Delphi 7. 2. Borland C++ and Delphi use the same machine code generator engine, so the optimizations are largely the same. The performance is largely the same. As you said, Delphi is single pass, and parses a good bit faster. 3. For those of you out there saying "huh? Pascal??? No one uses THAT??!?!" Guess again. It is used a lot more than you might think, typically by small, lean shops with insane deadlines like mine.
Wecome to the deep south. Well, maybe not. If you go into the Communications Computer Systems Operator career field, you could end up anywhere - Guam, Turkey, even California. Operators go everywhere. Programmers - the enlisted programmer career track at least - usually end up in Nebraska, Boston, or Montgomery, Alabama.
It aint bad. I had a worthwhile time in the Air Force, and a wonderful pay raise when I got out. The experience was valuable. Just be sure that if you enlist, your enlistment contract guarantees that you'll get the career field you want.
Recruiters lie. Lots.
--Former Senior Airman J Pitts, Standard Systems Group, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. Proud TIB 95/97 Prior.
Then...you agree with me. This is in fact what we do. Role-based permissions are explicitly set on all objects in our production databases, along with as much of the relational data busines rules as can be reasonably enforced by the RDBMS. Works quite well for us (Fortune 500 Retailer, daily sales transactions database)
Hmm. I tested your example for #1, and for MSSQL2kEE, the same query plan is used, regardless of whether you use a view or not. In fact, the MSSQL query optimizer does produce a plan very much like what you suggest ought to be produced. My gut tells me this is an issue with query optimizers and not views.
As for #2, we differ in opinion. I tend to use stored procedures to perform operations that change data, or for complicated operations that return a rowset.
#3, well....not everyone who needs write access to some tables needs write access to them all, and unfortunately, I haven't the power to shut down everyone with an ad-hoc query tool or MS Ack-cess.
#4 I have been using updateable views in a production environment, but then I'm the one that wrote the view and the code....
My anecdotal experience has been that, for what I use views for most - complex joins - on MSSQL - I do get a modest performance benefit. However, the performance benefit isn't why I use them. In the end, you have to know your platform and make decisions/tradeoffs, and you have to test.
How does that bear out, exactly? My concept of a view is a pre-compiled sql statement that can have permissions defined independantly of the underlying tables and which may or may not be updatable. The benefits are: 1 pre-compilation: yippee. 2. modularization: ya only gotta write it once 3. permissions: Why give permissions on your base tables to those pesky users? 4. updatable views: kinda follows from 3, IMHO
So, what are the downsides? Cites? Examples? Hard numbers?
Almost. IANODBA (Oracle DBA) but I do have a very good understanding how MS SQL clustered/federated database systems work. There is a hardware difference - the server NICs - that would make a pretty large difference for MSSQL federations. The Redhat/Oracle cluster uses two 64-bit Gigabit NICs per server, and the MS/Oracle cluster uses a 64-bit dual 10/100 NIC. Both, of course, used appropriate switches. Now, to be fair, the WinOracle cluster used 1120 disks to host the data, vs 976 in the LinOracle scenario. If you're wondering, more disks/arms CAN result in better performance, and it's possible that is the case here. FWIW, we use a lot of the same hardware here - 4x2MBXeon900 DL580s and MSA1000 disk arrays. We also use 8x DL760s. All running Win2k AS / MSCS / MSSQL2k - not federated clusters, just HA.
Among other things, XML Encryption gives you the ability to selectively encrypt individual elements of an XML document and do so in a way that clearly identifies what is encrypted and how. Just as in the example, you may want to pass around an XML document which, as a whole, is suitable for public consumption, but that contains parts you would like to keep secret and/or immutable. The alternative is to pass around multiple documents which then need to reference one another somehow.
As for SOAP, I agree with you. If you need secure SOAP, HTTPS is an excellent, mature solution. His statement that SOAP should work seamlessly with XML Encryption sounds enormously optimistic. But then, I've actually done SOAP interop work between disparate vendors of SOAP servers/clients, requiring quite a bit of tweaking in some cases. Funny, Websphere was one of those culprits;)
...and it looks like your ability to distinguish between a web server and a database server is right on a par with taco's spelling. That error you quoted was an admin screwup - nothing more.
Its funny you mention FUD. Its bad enough that companies like MS and Oracle and (*gasp!*) even Sun employ those tactics, but I suppose they do it out of some twisted duty to their stockholders. Whats your reasoning?
Claiming that its stability problems come solely from the "multitude of hardware configurations" is baltently false. In my anecdotal experience, however, properly configured, properly administered WinNT/Win2k/WinXP (WinPlayStation is just DOS with a pretty menu and a 32 bit API) machines - servers and workstations alike - enjoy the same uptime and stability as any other platform we run at this company. Likewise, complaining because one OS is more stable than another on a particular hardware configuration is a little silly if you haven't bothered to reference the Hardware Compatability List to see if you're even supported.
How is it possible that I have PC servers with better uptime statistics than production AS/400 boxes? How is it possible that RedHat raises a Signal 11 when I try to install it on the same workstation that has never blue-screened XP? Anecdotes are useless.
I can't comment on the height of the barrier, I can only say I know where the handholds are on the one I've climbed. Sticking with IIS gives me an advantage in my environment, but that doesn't make it the right choice in every environment. I'm GLAD there are choices.
I'm curious though. If Apache grows and develops an easy to use GUI administration interface, does that mean that the quality of Apache admins as a whole will go down? Just because of pretty widgets?
You are right. That is absolutely true. However, there are two mitigating factors:
1. My development skills (as far as web development goes - I am not primarily a web developer) are in ASP, ASP.Net, and ISAPI. 2. My admin staff knows IIS. They know how to tune it, how to plan for it, and how to secure it.
I'll not argue that Apache is a VERY capable web server for Windows. If I were doing JSP, I would certainly be considering Apache. Right now, however, my skills are best leveraged through IIS. In the future, when Mono matures, I'll be looking that way.
It is irresponsible to operate IIS if you don't understand the risks. However, understanding those risks, I can accomplish more business objectives - ie deliver more tested working code sooner - if I stick with what I know.
Just because I run IIS for production web servers does not mean that I am lazy or incapable of following the vendor's instructions for securing the box. Administered properly, IIS is a viable web server. Notice I didn't say better or faster, I said viable. If my staff knows how to administer Windows, and I know how to code for Windows, then it makes a hell of a lot more sense that we use Windows in our production environment.
I know this is a GNU/Linux/OSS advocacy site. I have a great deal of appreciation for Linux, not because I use it on a daily basis, but because it is forcing my OS vendor of choice to at least pretend to sit up, take notice, and focus on some things the market never forced them to focus on before.
Slashdot Mirror
Heres a sample from a few of our servers:
just to nitpick...
After all, the reason for a dual processor is to gain more processing power and speed, but a dual processor 800 meg chip will not perform as well as a simple single processor 1600 mhz chip and is more complex to program for.
Well, it depends. Well written web applications under a moderate to heavy load tend to perform better under the multi-processor configuration. More complex to program for? Yessss....scalability often is.
free-as-in-beer (as opposed to free-as-in-speech) refers to the cost. It's free!
Free-as-in-speech refers to the EULA. Some Free-as-in-speech EULAs include the GPL, the BSD license, and the MPL. These licenses vary in their degree of freedom granted to the end-user, but are generally considered free, especially compared to EULAs tied to many commercial products.
Free beer? I'd rather have cider myself....
Minus good reflection features, it's rather similiar to Java and C#, actually. Anders Hejlsberg, the original architect of Object Pascal, led the design team that created C#. I work with a lot of different languages on a regular basis, and OP/Delphi is one of my favorite. YMMV. IAAPP.
1. According to Borland, the name of the language is now simply "Delphi." This changed as of the release of Delphi 7.
2. Borland C++ and Delphi use the same machine code generator engine, so the optimizations are largely the same. The performance is largely the same. As you said, Delphi is single pass, and parses a good bit faster.
3. For those of you out there saying "huh? Pascal??? No one uses THAT??!?!" Guess again. It is used a lot more than you might think, typically by small, lean shops with insane deadlines like mine.
Not to bash Micro$oft, but if I got a first post Beowulf cluster of these, could I drive to Malda's house with it?
I was under the impression that they used UDMH - Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine - as a starter. Was that misguided?
Wecome to the deep south. Well, maybe not. If you go into the Communications Computer Systems Operator career field, you could end up anywhere - Guam, Turkey, even California. Operators go everywhere. Programmers - the enlisted programmer career track at least - usually end up in Nebraska, Boston, or Montgomery, Alabama.
It aint bad. I had a worthwhile time in the Air Force, and a wonderful pay raise when I got out. The experience was valuable. Just be sure that if you enlist, your enlistment contract guarantees that you'll get the career field you want.
Recruiters lie. Lots.
--Former Senior Airman J Pitts, Standard Systems Group, Maxwell AFB, Alabama. Proud TIB 95/97 Prior.
Then...you agree with me. This is in fact what we do. Role-based permissions are explicitly set on all objects in our production databases, along with as much of the relational data busines rules as can be reasonably enforced by the RDBMS. Works quite well for us (Fortune 500 Retailer, daily sales transactions database)
Hmm. I tested your example for #1, and for MSSQL2kEE, the same query plan is used, regardless of whether you use a view or not. In fact, the MSSQL query optimizer does produce a plan very much like what you suggest ought to be produced. My gut tells me this is an issue with query optimizers and not views.
As for #2, we differ in opinion. I tend to use stored procedures to perform operations that change data, or for complicated operations that return a rowset.
#3, well....not everyone who needs write access to some tables needs write access to them all, and unfortunately, I haven't the power to shut down everyone with an ad-hoc query tool or MS Ack-cess.
#4 I have been using updateable views in a production environment, but then I'm the one that wrote the view and the code....
My anecdotal experience has been that, for what I use views for most - complex joins - on MSSQL - I do get a modest performance benefit. However, the performance benefit isn't why I use them. In the end, you have to know your platform and make decisions/tradeoffs, and you have to test.
Views are also one of the worst pigs ever created
How does that bear out, exactly? My concept of a view is a pre-compiled sql statement that can have permissions defined independantly of the underlying tables and which may or may not be updatable. The benefits are:
1 pre-compilation: yippee.
2. modularization: ya only gotta write it once
3. permissions: Why give permissions on your base tables to those pesky users?
4. updatable views: kinda follows from 3, IMHO
So, what are the downsides? Cites? Examples? Hard numbers?
Almost. IANODBA (Oracle DBA) but I do have a very good understanding how MS SQL clustered/federated database systems work. There is a hardware difference - the server NICs - that would make a pretty large difference for MSSQL federations. The Redhat/Oracle cluster uses two 64-bit Gigabit NICs per server, and the MS/Oracle cluster uses a 64-bit dual 10/100 NIC. Both, of course, used appropriate switches. Now, to be fair, the WinOracle cluster used 1120 disks to host the data, vs 976 in the LinOracle scenario. If you're wondering, more disks/arms CAN result in better performance, and it's possible that is the case here. FWIW, we use a lot of the same hardware here - 4x2MBXeon900 DL580s and MSA1000 disk arrays. We also use 8x DL760s. All running Win2k AS / MSCS / MSSQL2k - not federated clusters, just HA.
Among other things, XML Encryption gives you the ability to selectively encrypt individual elements of an XML document and do so in a way that clearly identifies what is encrypted and how. Just as in the example, you may want to pass around an XML document which, as a whole, is suitable for public consumption, but that contains parts you would like to keep secret and/or immutable.
;)
The alternative is to pass around multiple documents which then need to reference one another somehow.
As for SOAP, I agree with you. If you need secure SOAP, HTTPS is an excellent, mature solution. His statement that SOAP should work seamlessly with XML Encryption sounds enormously optimistic. But then, I've actually done SOAP interop work between disparate vendors of SOAP servers/clients, requiring quite a bit of tweaking in some cases. Funny, Websphere was one of those culprits
...and it looks like your ability to distinguish between a web server and a database server is right on a par with taco's spelling. That error you quoted was an admin screwup - nothing more.
Someone tell me[....]
Ok.
Although I cannot confirm that it is SRAM.
well @!#$. I Was trying to moderate this up and fscked up. Any way to fix that?
Well, then the constant is off by one.
Number of Microsoft Believers: 1
Hey thanks for remembering me!
Hey, I'm a clueless Windows(tm) user, but I wanna whine about QuickTime too! Come on, guys! It sucks! Yeah!
Its funny you mention FUD. Its bad enough that companies like MS and Oracle and (*gasp!*) even Sun employ those tactics, but I suppose they do it out of some twisted duty to their stockholders. Whats your reasoning?
.Net is no more spastic mess than Java 2/J2EE
Claiming that its stability problems come solely from the "multitude of hardware configurations" is baltently false. In my anecdotal experience, however, properly configured, properly administered WinNT/Win2k/WinXP (WinPlayStation is just DOS with a pretty menu and a 32 bit API) machines - servers and workstations alike - enjoy the same uptime and stability as any other platform we run at this company. Likewise, complaining because one OS is more stable than another on a particular hardware configuration is a little silly if you haven't bothered to reference the Hardware Compatability List to see if you're even supported.
How is it possible that I have PC servers with better uptime statistics than production AS/400 boxes? How is it possible that RedHat raises a Signal 11 when I try to install it on the same workstation that has never blue-screened XP? Anecdotes are useless.
I can't comment on the height of the barrier, I can only say I know where the handholds are on the one I've climbed. Sticking with IIS gives me an advantage in my environment, but that doesn't make it the right choice in every environment. I'm GLAD there are choices.
I'm curious though. If Apache grows and develops an easy to use GUI administration interface, does that mean that the quality of Apache admins as a whole will go down? Just because of pretty widgets?
You are right. That is absolutely true. However, there are two mitigating factors:
1. My development skills (as far as web development goes - I am not primarily a web developer) are in ASP, ASP.Net, and ISAPI.
2. My admin staff knows IIS. They know how to tune it, how to plan for it, and how to secure it.
I'll not argue that Apache is a VERY capable web server for Windows. If I were doing JSP, I would certainly be considering Apache. Right now, however, my skills are best leveraged through IIS. In the future, when Mono matures, I'll be looking that way.
It is irresponsible to operate IIS if you don't understand the risks. However, understanding those risks, I can accomplish more business objectives - ie deliver more tested working code sooner - if I stick with what I know.
Just because I run IIS for production web servers does not mean that I am lazy or incapable of following the vendor's instructions for securing the box. Administered properly, IIS is a viable web server. Notice I didn't say better or faster, I said viable. If my staff knows how to administer Windows, and I know how to code for Windows, then it makes a hell of a lot more sense that we use Windows in our production environment.
I know this is a GNU/Linux/OSS advocacy site. I have a great deal of appreciation for Linux, not because I use it on a daily basis, but because it is forcing my OS vendor of choice to at least pretend to sit up, take notice, and focus on some things the market never forced them to focus on before.
I know. I done been trolled.