Having a RAID with parity arrangement does not require equal disks sizes, it's simpler and computationally easier to design but not set in stone.
Let's say I have the $$ for 4 hard drives at this time, and later on want to add a 5th equally sized HD to expand the pool. Or as I suggested before adding larger replacement drives one at a time until the whole pool is replaced.
It would be NICE if RAIDZ could redistribute the data and grow the pool without requiring the large investment of purchasing a whole new set of drives at one time.
A common scenario is a home user has wanted a RAID setup for a long time but can't afford a nice enclosure and a set of disks. What ends up happening is they get a slowly growing collection of external HDs that they buy as space requirements demand it. So maybe a 160GB here, a 200GB there, a 400 and a 500 in a stack.
In dreamland what someone could do is a buy a fresh set of 500GB or so HDs, format them ZFS. Then copy some data onto it, format another HD as ZFS, add it to the pool and continue until all their HDs are part of a RAIDZ.
That's quite a pony isn't it?:-) If you read the blog post above you'll see that it's not entirely unreasonable and it may end up added in the future.
The real killer for end-user ZFS is it's lack of expandibility. Let's say you buy 4x500GB externals and set up a RAIDZ on it. Later on prices go down and you get yourself a nice 2TB drive for $150 but don't have the cash to get 3 more of them just yet. So you swap a single 500GB HD for the new 2TB you just got and total pool size remains at 2 TB until you get the greens to replace the other 3, then your pool size will grow.
Sun ZFS devs have even stated that they'd love to add the ability to grow a set of disks but since they're focused on the enterprise they won't be focusing on this for quite some time.
Until they make it easier to add storage to a RAIDZ pool it's going to limit home user adoption.
I've wondered, can you do a sort of "clean room benchmarking" in cases like this? It's sort of ridiculous, but at least it would get some benchmarks out there.
ie: Bob installs hostile EULA software which forbids benchmarking, Steve asks Bob if he can use the server for a bit. "Why sure Steve, no problem". Steve then runs a comprehensive set of benchmarks and publishes the results. Steve never installed or bought the software and certainly never agreed to the EULA. Bob doesn't even know what Steve was doing and doesn't care to ask.
The source code button on the laptops. Those won't be very useful once Windows and it's "free" selection of closed-source apps jump onboard. "My button is broken" "No, that's just Windows"
"We're seeing more requests outside of creative services to switch to Macs from PCs," notes David Plavin, operations manager for Mac systems engineering at the U.S. IT division of Publicis Groupe, a global advertising conglomerate. There are so many requests that Plavin now supports 2,500 Macs across the U.S. -- nearly a quarter of all Publicis' U.S. PCs. There that sorts it out, 2500 is no where near 1/4 of all US pc's... damn
You're just reading too fast and getting offended at what you perceive as Mac fanboism... they are stating that 2,500 Macs are 1/4 of Publicis' US computer systems. So it's an anecdotal report of one particular companies growing Mac trend. Read what you want from it, but it's not talking about Macs being 25% of the US PC sales or anything like that. Slow down and as a Technocarpenter might say "Read twice, reply once."
Put the laptop on it's side. Now you've got the tallest laptop screen in the coffee shop man. Everyone will be all "Ohhh is that the new Mac laptop I heard about?"
I'm not sure what the current price is compared to your 3000 sek but it's REALLY easy to unlock iPhones now. About a dozen different programs to do it for Windows and Macs, probably Linux as well if you look around since several are open source. It's so simple now you just plug it in and click "Unlock" and it's done in less than 5 minutes. There's nothing that prevents you from walking into an Apple store, picking one up in a box and unlocking it as soon as you get home. The unlockers also activate it so no need to even touch AT&T for a second.
So basically you're saying the problem is the ease of abusing confidential information and in theory your CC info should be able to leak and nobody profit from it. I'll give that in that particular instance and even in the "yelling fire" situation that it's really the actions of others that make the speech supposedly illegal.
I can see you're for a transparent society, I don't really want to go into the whole "think of the children" bit... perhaps leaking army or police strategy information that gets others killed, or whatever scenario I can come up. Or heck people publicly outing that someone cheated on their spouse. Basically any information or speech with the goal of causing injury to others is what I mean. Let's say someone posts that you peed on the koran and L. Ron Hubbard's grave while burning a flag holding a cross. Then posts your address and an army of whackos burns your house down and kills you. Obviously the whackos are responsible for their own actions, but you can't clear the earth of them and the potential for abuse as well as a hundred other stupid situations still exist.
Now I understand your concern about who gets to define the limits, and given that there's no perfect solution the idea of limits is tasteless. The grounds that any legislative body can be corrupted can as easily be used to say there should be no laws at all. How do we then govern ourselves if every law can be abused? We have to try don't we?
Your equation of free speech with anonymous speech leaves out many examples where free speech actually has consequences. There's the whole fire in a crowded theatre thing, libel and probably others I'm forgetting.
Are you actually saying free speech needs to be an absolute? What about when an anonymous poster online puts up your credit card #, address, phone, etc... everything and ruins your life, what then?
I agree to your first part that free speech naturally leads to hate speech, but I'm curious where you feel the line needs to be drawn.
"For long-distance navigation and for birds doing a journey for the first time, they will use their inbuilt compasses and take sun and star bearings.
advertisement
"But once homing pigeons have flown a journey more than once, they home in on a habitual route home, much as we do when we are driving or walking home from work.
"In short, it looks like it is mentally easier for a bird to fly down a road and then turn right. They are just making their journey as simple as possible".
Good way to misrepresent the article. I wonder what that sort of argumentative fallacy is called.
When the source states A + B, but you cite it as A only. Very nice, I'll keep an eye out for future use of this technique. Not that you did it on purpose, perhaps you only read the title which is also misleading.
Yeah they just passed Toshiba last quarter, next up is Acer, then HP and finally Dell. We'll see where they currently stand with the next report from Apple coming soon.
It doesn't seem to be enabled by default. Same with Control and mouse wheel for zooming, you have to turn it on yourself.
Apple's come as "one button" by default, if you know what a second button is you can turn it on in System Prefs but it's done not to confuse grammas. Remember that Control clicking always works if you're using someone else's laptop and they're used to single button operation.
Plus they usually aren't aware when you're sick on the weekend so it's not balanced out by the 2/7 times you're sick on your own time. They only know when it affects them, so it's sort of a selection bias as well.
You know what man. "Managed copy" is gonna suck. I was at Walmart yesterday and I noticed among the $5 DVDs a small row with $13 DVDs in a redish box. You can find great hits like "The Dark Crystal" and "Neverending Story" that usually got for $7.50 combined with another. In fact you can walk one aisle over and do just that. So why are these few lame old movies being offered at a drasticly increased price? Because THOSE awesome DVDs are advertised to have a special DIGITAL copy already included that you are allowed to copy to your computer and view (after activation of course).
All those stories about DVDs with pre-ripped WMV and now iTunes compatible DRM files on them will NOT be given to the masses as a free gift offering from the MAFIAA apologizing for all those years of trying to fight DVD ripping. No you will PAY for the privilege of having a crappy version of something you can do much better on your own computer for free. So don't think managed copy is going to make things any easier for us, they're just going to charge more for it.
You know all too often I hear of IP over Carrier Pidgeon as the next generation of internet technology, something even bigger than Web 2.0 and software as a service. I'm sure it's going to actualize our paradigm shifts and all that but seriously lets get some cold hard FACTS into the discussion.
Firstly: Where are the numbers on latency and bandwidth? Details like this are frequently brushed aside when making unrealistic promises. Let's stop listening to the marketing department and talk to the engineers working specifically with IP over Carrier Pidgeon and IP over Avian Carrier in general. (From here on referred to as IPoAC) We have no hard numbers on packet size limits.
Secondly: What is the average delay on DNS resolution? Another salient fact glossed over is that IPoAC completely depends on DNS caches as name lookups are expensive. As well as how long does it take to train new carriers til they are able to follow the new routes?
These and other questions lead me to believe that IPoAC is entirely VAPOR and has most likely not even been successfully implemented in the real world.
Does anyone have any real stats we can use to examine this? Or is IPoAC just going to be rammed down our throats by another mega-corporation with an agenda? It's time to really open the discussion on IPoAC.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand your reply, but this is an often requested feature that ZFS devs are aware of and would like to add if they had more resources.
:-) If you read the blog post above you'll see that it's not entirely unreasonable and it may end up added in the future.
http://blogs.sun.com/ahl/entry/expand_o_matic_raid_z
Having a RAID with parity arrangement does not require equal disks sizes, it's simpler and computationally easier to design but not set in stone.
Let's say I have the $$ for 4 hard drives at this time, and later on want to add a 5th equally sized HD to expand the pool. Or as I suggested before adding larger replacement drives one at a time until the whole pool is replaced.
It would be NICE if RAIDZ could redistribute the data and grow the pool without requiring the large investment of purchasing a whole new set of drives at one time.
A common scenario is a home user has wanted a RAID setup for a long time but can't afford a nice enclosure and a set of disks. What ends up happening is they get a slowly growing collection of external HDs that they buy as space requirements demand it. So maybe a 160GB here, a 200GB there, a 400 and a 500 in a stack.
In dreamland what someone could do is a buy a fresh set of 500GB or so HDs, format them ZFS. Then copy some data onto it, format another HD as ZFS, add it to the pool and continue until all their HDs are part of a RAIDZ.
That's quite a pony isn't it?
The real killer for end-user ZFS is it's lack of expandibility. Let's say you buy 4x500GB externals and set up a RAIDZ on it. Later on prices go down and you get yourself a nice 2TB drive for $150 but don't have the cash to get 3 more of them just yet. So you swap a single 500GB HD for the new 2TB you just got and total pool size remains at 2 TB until you get the greens to replace the other 3, then your pool size will grow.
Sun ZFS devs have even stated that they'd love to add the ability to grow a set of disks but since they're focused on the enterprise they won't be focusing on this for quite some time.
Until they make it easier to add storage to a RAIDZ pool it's going to limit home user adoption.
I've wondered, can you do a sort of "clean room benchmarking" in cases like this? It's sort of ridiculous, but at least it would get some benchmarks out there.
ie: Bob installs hostile EULA software which forbids benchmarking, Steve asks Bob if he can use the server for a bit. "Why sure Steve, no problem". Steve then runs a comprehensive set of benchmarks and publishes the results. Steve never installed or bought the software and certainly never agreed to the EULA. Bob doesn't even know what Steve was doing and doesn't care to ask.
The source code button on the laptops. Those won't be very useful once Windows and it's "free" selection of closed-source apps jump onboard. "My button is broken" "No, that's just Windows"
You're just reading too fast and getting offended at what you perceive as Mac fanboism... they are stating that 2,500 Macs are 1/4 of Publicis' US computer systems. So it's an anecdotal report of one particular companies growing Mac trend. Read what you want from it, but it's not talking about Macs being 25% of the US PC sales or anything like that. Slow down and as a Technocarpenter might say "Read twice, reply once."
I ask for 25 discs at a time, put a pile of them on my desk at work, and they're gone in a week.
Sadly my experiences trying that have not resulted in a stunning success...
maybe working at Subway has something to do with that.
Bicycles cost automobile industry $30 BILLION DOLLARS in lost revenue. The damage done by walking is incalculable.
Remember! If it walks... it's a terrorist.
Put the laptop on it's side. Now you've got the tallest laptop screen in the coffee shop man. Everyone will be all "Ohhh is that the new Mac laptop I heard about?"
How long before some idiot in government makes it true?
You guys jumped on dryer sheets at your school? Daaaang freaky lil short kids.
I'm not sure what the current price is compared to your 3000 sek but it's REALLY easy to unlock iPhones now. About a dozen different programs to do it for Windows and Macs, probably Linux as well if you look around since several are open source. It's so simple now you just plug it in and click "Unlock" and it's done in less than 5 minutes. There's nothing that prevents you from walking into an Apple store, picking one up in a box and unlocking it as soon as you get home. The unlockers also activate it so no need to even touch AT&T for a second.
So basically you're saying the problem is the ease of abusing confidential information and in theory your CC info should be able to leak and nobody profit from it. I'll give that in that particular instance and even in the "yelling fire" situation that it's really the actions of others that make the speech supposedly illegal.
I can see you're for a transparent society, I don't really want to go into the whole "think of the children" bit... perhaps leaking army or police strategy information that gets others killed, or whatever scenario I can come up. Or heck people publicly outing that someone cheated on their spouse. Basically any information or speech with the goal of causing injury to others is what I mean. Let's say someone posts that you peed on the koran and L. Ron Hubbard's grave while burning a flag holding a cross. Then posts your address and an army of whackos burns your house down and kills you. Obviously the whackos are responsible for their own actions, but you can't clear the earth of them and the potential for abuse as well as a hundred other stupid situations still exist.
Now I understand your concern about who gets to define the limits, and given that there's no perfect solution the idea of limits is tasteless. The grounds that any legislative body can be corrupted can as easily be used to say there should be no laws at all. How do we then govern ourselves if every law can be abused? We have to try don't we?
Your equation of free speech with anonymous speech leaves out many examples where free speech actually has consequences. There's the whole fire in a crowded theatre thing, libel and probably others I'm forgetting.
Are you actually saying free speech needs to be an absolute? What about when an anonymous poster online puts up your credit card #, address, phone, etc... everything and ruins your life, what then?
I agree to your first part that free speech naturally leads to hate speech, but I'm curious where you feel the line needs to be drawn.
Good way to misrepresent the article. I wonder what that sort of argumentative fallacy is called.
When the source states A + B, but you cite it as A only. Very nice, I'll keep an eye out for future use of this technique. Not that you did it on purpose, perhaps you only read the title which is also misleading.
Ya know as long as we're listing them...
There's also Martinique, Dominica, Libya and others.
Thought Quebec was ignored but on closer inspection there's just nothing there.
Also the Dominican Republic. Notice Haiti on the left all tagged and detailed.
I'm deaf you insensitive clod!
Yeah they just passed Toshiba last quarter, next up is Acer, then HP and finally Dell. We'll see where they currently stand with the next report from Apple coming soon.
I had that exact same experience a few years ago... except it was a bank... and I didn't tell them who I was.
If the network's owner has specified that anyone can use it, why is it bad to do so?
Because the world is slowly moving one step after the other towards a new legal concept "Guilty until proven innocent".
It doesn't seem to be enabled by default. Same with Control and mouse wheel for zooming, you have to turn it on yourself.
Apple's come as "one button" by default, if you know what a second button is you can turn it on in System Prefs but it's done not to confuse grammas. Remember that Control clicking always works if you're using someone else's laptop and they're used to single button operation.
Plus they usually aren't aware when you're sick on the weekend so it's not balanced out by the 2/7 times you're sick on your own time. They only know when it affects them, so it's sort of a selection bias as well.
That's interesting... what about Samoans?
You know what man. "Managed copy" is gonna suck. I was at Walmart yesterday and I noticed among the $5 DVDs a small row with $13 DVDs in a redish box. You can find great hits like "The Dark Crystal" and "Neverending Story" that usually got for $7.50 combined with another. In fact you can walk one aisle over and do just that. So why are these few lame old movies being offered at a drasticly increased price? Because THOSE awesome DVDs are advertised to have a special DIGITAL copy already included that you are allowed to copy to your computer and view (after activation of course).
All those stories about DVDs with pre-ripped WMV and now iTunes compatible DRM files on them will NOT be given to the masses as a free gift offering from the MAFIAA apologizing for all those years of trying to fight DVD ripping. No you will PAY for the privilege of having a crappy version of something you can do much better on your own computer for free. So don't think managed copy is going to make things any easier for us, they're just going to charge more for it.
You know all too often I hear of IP over Carrier Pidgeon as the next generation of internet technology, something even bigger than Web 2.0 and software as a service. I'm sure it's going to actualize our paradigm shifts and all that but seriously lets get some cold hard FACTS into the discussion.
Firstly:
Where are the numbers on latency and bandwidth?
Details like this are frequently brushed aside when making unrealistic promises. Let's stop listening to the marketing department and talk to the engineers working specifically with IP over Carrier Pidgeon and IP over Avian Carrier in general. (From here on referred to as IPoAC) We have no hard numbers on packet size limits.
Secondly:
What is the average delay on DNS resolution?
Another salient fact glossed over is that IPoAC completely depends on DNS caches as name lookups are expensive. As well as how long does it take to train new carriers til they are able to follow the new routes?
These and other questions lead me to believe that IPoAC is entirely VAPOR and has most likely not even been successfully implemented in the real world.
Does anyone have any real stats we can use to examine this? Or is IPoAC just going to be rammed down our throats by another mega-corporation with an agenda? It's time to really open the discussion on IPoAC.