There was a survey done a while back.. on Intel boxes. I wish I still had the link.:-(
The test ran an MS C++ application, and a Java application that basically did the same thing. They also used various vendor JVMs.
On a plain, single instance, the C++ ran faster. That's to be expected. Also, IBM's JVM was a bit slower than some of the others (but not _much_ slower... and clearly still within the running).
When the number of threads/instances of the application ramped up, the IBM JVM kicked butt... even running faster than the MS C++ application.
So, when you say that Java Sux... better be explicit! Generalizations are almost always incorrect.
Close. The new offering, VIF (Virtual Image Facility) is basically CP-only, and runs virtualized images (all the hardware interrupts and such become virtualized... and you're right, only the CP runs "native" on the hardware) of Linux. VIF is for Linux only. No CMS. Customer gets to choose.
Everyone seems to think that OS/390 is just a renaming of MVS...not quite so. It's all of the older MVS plus more than the Unix95 suite of APIs. (Yes, Virginia, you can run an ascii telnet session into a UNIX shell on OS/390. All APIs, be they the UNIX suite, or the traditional MVS suite are available to any application.) OS/390 is based on the rock-solid MVS baseline OS, though.
There's another layering of resource partitioning though on S/390 (and now on the z/Series) besides VM and VIF. It's called PR/SM (Processor Resources / Systems Manager)... and it allows the logical partitioning (LPAR) of the entire system so that it can run multiple OS's at once. That means that in one LPAR, you could be running OS/390... in another VIF with Linux. These LPARs do NOT have to have physical processors dedicated to them... even a UNI processor can be LPAR'd. Loading between the LPARs can be done via wieghts (or in the z/Series by an extention of Workload Manager to the hardware layer.. making it much more dynamic than weighting.) This way, if at 2am, the Linux load is light... the OS/390 load can have ALL of the cycles... if the Linux load spikes, it gets what it needs (up to its weight)... so the potential exists to use all of the processor resource...all of the time. I know organizations that run their S/390s at 99% cpu busy on average for weeks at a time... and maintain interactive response times where they should be.
Now, take all this and imagine an e-commerce scenario with Linux/Apache running the front end, and OS/390 with the transaction server and big, honking database on the backend... all on one footprint. That's where WAS and DB2 connectors on Linux/390 will really show their stuff!
Customers running on high-end systems... No? Then why all the intrest for Linux on S/390? I'd think most would agree that large S/390s (and the new z/Series) would qualify as high-end systems, wouldn't you?
Actually, just for point of information, the worlds largest transactional RDBMs's are on DB2 on S/390 Parallel Sysplex. I'm talking many billions of rows, perhaps a couple billion online updates, and many hundreds of thousand ad-hoc queries in a given day, online 24x7.
Many larger customers have DB2 skills. They also have needs for an RDBMS on other, smaller or distributed platforms. Why not leverage the skills they have by instlling DB2 on Linux servers? People end up being more expensive than the hardware or the software.
You bring up a point that adds to this role as CPO for an international organization like IBM. Since they not only do business, but have manufacturing facilities, and marketing/sales divisions around the world, all of the Privacy Policies and Laws in those geographies must be understood and adhered to.
Some time back, IBM said they wouldn't do business on the internet (even things like Advert banners) with sites that didn't have a stated privacy policy.
So I strongly doubt that this is a rubber-stamp position. What that individual's power is, and what they do with the position is, obviously, yet to be seen and proven.
No one is saying there's anything wrong with NOT giving S.E. content to minors. The problem is that it's virtually impossible to validate who sees what on the Internet. I found the ruling to be very insigtful on the merits against the Act and in favor of upholding the injunction.
This law would mean that if you chose to publish some medical question to a forum or chat room, even anonymously about human sexuality, you could be sujected to arrest for a felony under this law...even if you weren't in Michigan... all that would have to happen is to have that forum or chat room be available to minors on the internet who do reside in Michigan. Since you can't identify everyone who is involved in such a forum (because doing so would remove the anonymity that often fosters open communication), you'd have no idea who else was "listening."
That's why it's so important to NOT censor the internet and our rights to freedom of speech... because it comes back to attack us at the source point of such speech. That effects our entire society as a whole in a negative fashion.
I think the Judge's comments about parental control, and perhaps most humorously, the comment that "Finally, the Court takes judicial notice of the fact that every computer is equipped with an
on/off switch. " are quite sage.
I see a lot of netbios attacks... (139) and a lot of broadcasts to port 137. These are often windoze users who haven't wised up and are allowing their machines with file sharing do "network neighborhood" brodcasts looking for other machines...presumably on the same network. I even see broadcasts with destination addresses other than mine, but they're within the same subnet mask. I have to use some windoze stuff for my job, unfortunately, but I make sure that I filter those ports out both for ingress/egress. Since sometimes co-workers will drop by and just "plug in" to my network to be online, my filters protect them as well, even if they haven't turned off windoze file/print sharing.
Also, don't discount the possibility that someone is using the DNS address to spoof their address when doing scans. I have SDSL, and don't have the same problem, my ISP lets me do what I want, even run servers. I have a "real" firewall appliance (Sonic Wall) that blocks port scans, and even sends alerts when they're detected. It now does this in "stealth mode" where the packets are just dropped rather than replied to with a RST. It'd be easy enough to set this firewall up to block the DNS IP address to ports higher than 1024, and it'd just toss the requests away.
Regarding loans, retention contracts, etc... IMO, the difference is if it's employee selected training (like working on an advanced degree) vs. training that's necessary to maintain the explicit job function. In this case, a one week class hardly warrants the effort of all the hoo-hah and arm waiving, not to mention the probably mis-understanding of management intent by the employee. If it's a multiple-course curriculum, then such overhead may be appropriate.
Lave the machine labeled at $0.75, but make it work on a quarter. That way you get your soda at a discount, and others won't raid the machine, because, unless someone blabs a lot, it still LOOKS like a seventy-five cent outlay.:-)
Actually, the high pay may eliminate some external stresses, but my experience has been that the higher pay, the more visibility, the larger the projects, and the higher the stress _at work_. Higher paying jobs also mean more work hours, less time to do personal stuff, which in turn can increase the external life stresses.
Basically, TANSTAAFL.
I've also found that the only job security (from working in the IT industry for almost 30 years now) is maintaining one's marketability.
Slashdot Mirror
That's strange.. I have Netscrape 4.7 and had no problems with it at all at this site.
There was a survey done a while back.. on Intel boxes. I wish I still had the link. :-(
The test ran an MS C++ application, and a Java application that basically did the same thing. They also used various vendor JVMs.
On a plain, single instance, the C++ ran faster. That's to be expected. Also, IBM's JVM was a bit slower than some of the others (but not _much_ slower... and clearly still within the running).
When the number of threads/instances of the application ramped up, the IBM JVM kicked butt... even running faster than the MS C++ application.
So, when you say that Java Sux... better be explicit! Generalizations are almost always incorrect.
Close. The new offering, VIF (Virtual Image Facility) is basically CP-only, and runs virtualized images (all the hardware interrupts and such become virtualized... and you're right, only the CP runs "native" on the hardware) of Linux. VIF is for Linux only. No CMS. Customer gets to choose.
Everyone seems to think that OS/390 is just a renaming of MVS...not quite so. It's all of the older MVS plus more than the Unix95 suite of APIs. (Yes, Virginia, you can run an ascii telnet session into a UNIX shell on OS/390. All APIs, be they the UNIX suite, or the traditional MVS suite are available to any application.) OS/390 is based on the rock-solid MVS baseline OS, though.
There's another layering of resource partitioning though on S/390 (and now on the z/Series) besides VM and VIF. It's called PR/SM (Processor Resources / Systems Manager)... and it allows the logical partitioning (LPAR) of the entire system so that it can run multiple OS's at once. That means that in one LPAR, you could be running OS/390... in another VIF with Linux. These LPARs do NOT have to have physical processors dedicated to them... even a UNI processor can be LPAR'd. Loading between the LPARs can be done via wieghts (or in the z/Series by an extention of Workload Manager to the hardware layer.. making it much more dynamic than weighting.) This way, if at 2am, the Linux load is light... the OS/390 load can have ALL of the cycles... if the Linux load spikes, it gets what it needs (up to its weight)... so the potential exists to use all of the processor resource...all of the time. I know organizations that run their S/390s at 99% cpu busy on average for weeks at a time... and maintain interactive response times where they should be.
Now, take all this and imagine an e-commerce scenario with Linux/Apache running the front end, and OS/390 with the transaction server and big, honking database on the backend... all on one footprint. That's where WAS and DB2 connectors on Linux/390 will really show their stuff!
Customers running on high-end systems... No? Then why all the intrest for Linux on S/390? I'd think most would agree that large S/390s (and the new z/Series) would qualify as high-end systems, wouldn't you?
Actually, just for point of information, the worlds largest transactional RDBMs's are on DB2 on S/390 Parallel Sysplex. I'm talking many billions of rows, perhaps a couple billion online updates, and many hundreds of thousand ad-hoc queries in a given day, online 24x7.
Many larger customers have DB2 skills. They also have needs for an RDBMS on other, smaller or distributed platforms. Why not leverage the skills they have by instlling DB2 on Linux servers? People end up being more expensive than the hardware or the software.
You bring up a point that adds to this role as CPO for an international organization like IBM. Since they not only do business, but have manufacturing facilities, and marketing/sales divisions around the world, all of the Privacy Policies and Laws in those geographies must be understood and adhered to.
Some time back, IBM said they wouldn't do business on the internet (even things like Advert banners) with sites that didn't have a stated privacy policy.
So I strongly doubt that this is a rubber-stamp position. What that individual's power is, and what they do with the position is, obviously, yet to be seen and proven.
No one is saying there's anything wrong with NOT giving S.E. content to minors. The problem is that it's virtually impossible to validate who sees what on the Internet. I found the ruling to be very insigtful on the merits against the Act and in favor of upholding the injunction.
This law would mean that if you chose to publish some medical question to a forum or chat room, even anonymously about human sexuality, you could be sujected to arrest for a felony under this law...even if you weren't in Michigan... all that would have to happen is to have that forum or chat room be available to minors on the internet who do reside in Michigan. Since you can't identify everyone who is involved in such a forum (because doing so would remove the anonymity that often fosters open communication), you'd have no idea who else was "listening."
That's why it's so important to NOT censor the internet and our rights to freedom of speech... because it comes back to attack us at the source point of such speech. That effects our entire society as a whole in a negative fashion.
I think the Judge's comments about parental control, and perhaps most humorously, the comment that "Finally, the Court takes judicial notice of the fact that every computer is equipped with an
on/off switch. " are quite sage.
I see a lot of netbios attacks... (139) and a lot of broadcasts to port 137. These are often windoze users who haven't wised up and are allowing their machines with file sharing do "network neighborhood" brodcasts looking for other machines...presumably on the same network. I even see broadcasts with destination addresses other than mine, but they're within the same subnet mask. I have to use some windoze stuff for my job, unfortunately, but I make sure that I filter those ports out both for ingress/egress. Since sometimes co-workers will drop by and just "plug in" to my network to be online, my filters protect them as well, even if they haven't turned off windoze file/print sharing.
YMMV = Your Mileage May Vary
Also, don't discount the possibility that someone is using the DNS address to spoof their address when doing scans. I have SDSL, and don't have the same problem, my ISP lets me do what I want, even run servers. I have a "real" firewall appliance (Sonic Wall) that blocks port scans, and even sends alerts when they're detected. It now does this in "stealth mode" where the packets are just dropped rather than replied to with a RST. It'd be easy enough to set this firewall up to block the DNS IP address to ports higher than 1024, and it'd just toss the requests away.
Regarding loans, retention contracts, etc... IMO, the difference is if it's employee selected training (like working on an advanced degree) vs. training that's necessary to maintain the explicit job function. In this case, a one week class hardly warrants the effort of all the hoo-hah and arm waiving, not to mention the probably mis-understanding of management intent by the employee. If it's a multiple-course curriculum, then such overhead may be appropriate.
Lave the machine labeled at $0.75, but make it work on a quarter. That way you get your soda at a discount, and others won't raid the machine, because, unless someone blabs a lot, it still LOOKS like a seventy-five cent outlay. :-)
Actually, the high pay may eliminate some external stresses, but my experience has been that the higher pay, the more visibility, the larger the projects, and the higher the stress _at work_. Higher paying jobs also mean more work hours, less time to do personal stuff, which in turn can increase the external life stresses.
Basically, TANSTAAFL.
I've also found that the only job security (from working in the IT industry for almost 30 years now) is maintaining one's marketability.