Of course you can have a fraction of a bit per second. I can easily swap out, say, a 56 kbps oscillator with something that pumps out on ocillations per day. That's 11.5 ubps (micro bits per second).
You might have just stumbled onto a new suitability test. The search is currently looking for new numbers, it doesn't care if you skip some of them on the way.
school is supposed to prepare you for the work force
University (what TFS mentions) is not supposed to prepare you for the workforce. University is supposed to teach to you think. Once you know how to think, it's your job to figure out how to work. If you went to a university to prepare you for the workforce, you got swindled. Go to Technical or Vocational school, like DeVry or ITT Tech.
That said, this genre of algorithms should be included in an algorithms class. At least introduce the concept, so that people that have learned how to think don't have to re-invent another wheel.
There's no reason a chemist, biologist, or physicist needs internet-scale data sets if the systems they study are simply not that large.
Yes, if the systems are not that large. But I think all three of your examples are poorly chosen. You picked the three groups of scientists that are (as a field) producing huge data sets. Have you seen the amount of data generated in a single run of a small particle accelerator? Plasma containment simulations? Chemistry simulations (esp. where it pertains to biology)? I get this list from reading slashdot. I'm sure there are a lot more fields that I'm unaware of.
Yes, not every physicist is working on a particle accelerator. But enough of them are that some of them will benefit from this training.
It could explain why we see more matter than anti-matter. We're less than 50% of the way through time. Think of the matter/antimatter ratio as a universal progress bar...
This is already available.
If you have the money, use private schools.
If you don't have that much money, have one parent quit and homeschool.
If you can't afford one income, then you're already part of the "poor [we can't help] against their will" (Apologies to the single parents).
Or you're just blowing smoke.
Which is it?
only one disk needs to be rebuilt and even for a large disk that doesn't take very long.
That depends. I can clone a 120GB SATA drive in about 2 hours, if I dedicate all the IO to the clone operation. Admittedly, this is on my laptop (which peaks around 30MB/s), but it's also a dedicated sequential read from the source and write to the destination. If I try and use both disks while the cloning is occuring, the clone is slowed down significantly. I would expect that operation to drop to well below 30MB/s.
On top of that, a lot of RAID card/implementation will cap the amount of I/O that can be consumed by a rebuild. My Linux software RAID1 caps the transfer rate (I *think* around 10MB/s, but I'm kind of guessing. The trivial test I tried didn't run long enough to hit the cap, and I don't want to rebuild the big volume just for the fun of it).
All these things add up to a much longer rebuild time than a back of the envelope calculation would indicate.
RAID5 is not redundant during a single drive failure. Once the failed drive is rebuilt, it is singly redundant again.
RAID6 attempts to keep a fully redundant array even during a single drive failure. Once the failed drive is rebuilt, it doubly redundant (redundantly redundant?). 2 drive failures make a RAID6 look the same as a RAID5 with 1 drive failure.
RAID1+0 is partially redundant during a single drive failure. The downside is that it focuses the stress of rebuilding the failed drive on a single drive (it's mirror). If the mirrors are not from the same manufacturing lot, the probabilities of a 2nd failure is fairly well known. If the failed drive and it's mirror come from the same manufacturing lot, the risk of a 2nd failure (during rebuild) increase considerably.
I personally run RAID1+0, with the RAID1 part being a two way mirror. I'm debating making the RAID1 portion a 3-way mirror. Just to assuage my paranoia.
How did you change this setting? I don't recall seeing this setting in hdparm or smartcrl. Is there a WD utility for this?
I don't have a need for this info, I just want to poke around.:-)
There was a story a couple years back about the RF shielding properties of non-metallic materials. I'm having a bit of trouble finding the link. IIRC, cardboard won.
Do we really need another class of uneducated hippy children.
I'd like to point out that the Hippies were all very well educated (in general). They were able to think for themselves, which generated the Hippy Revolution, which eventually led to <hat type="tinfoil">modern school "reforms" to prevent that from happening again</hat>. So yes, I would prefer another generation of "hippy children".
I'm not saying that modern Public Schools are bad. I'm saying that I have better alternatives available. My wife was a teacher, before she quit to be a stay at home mom and home schooler. So suddenly my 3 children are getting much less of an education than the 20+ students in her classroom?
Slashdot Mirror
on ocillations
"one oscillation"
Of course you can have a fraction of a bit per second. I can easily swap out, say, a 56 kbps oscillator with something that pumps out on ocillations per day. That's 11.5 ubps (micro bits per second).
You might have just stumbled onto a new suitability test. The search is currently looking for new numbers, it doesn't care if you skip some of them on the way.
Finally! A thread where "7 of 9" and "procreation" aren't offtopic!
If none of the radar bounces come back, you must be moving away at at the speed of light. Definitely over the limit.
Californians thought so, that's why they approved the California High Speed Rail
It would also be quite impossible to play FPS or other kinds of games with this type of setup.
I said that about a mouse. The serial mice of the time were utterly useless in a FPS. Now look what happened.
So you're saying Bang is "!", !"*"?
Sounds like somebody has been reading Outliers
school is supposed to prepare you for the work force
University (what TFS mentions) is not supposed to prepare you for the workforce. University is supposed to teach to you think. Once you know how to think, it's your job to figure out how to work. If you went to a university to prepare you for the workforce, you got swindled. Go to Technical or Vocational school, like DeVry or ITT Tech.
That said, this genre of algorithms should be included in an algorithms class. At least introduce the concept, so that people that have learned how to think don't have to re-invent another wheel.
There's no reason a chemist, biologist, or physicist needs internet-scale data sets if the systems they study are simply not that large.
Yes, if the systems are not that large. But I think all three of your examples are poorly chosen. You picked the three groups of scientists that are (as a field) producing huge data sets. Have you seen the amount of data generated in a single run of a small particle accelerator? Plasma containment simulations? Chemistry simulations (esp. where it pertains to biology)? I get this list from reading slashdot. I'm sure there are a lot more fields that I'm unaware of.
Yes, not every physicist is working on a particle accelerator. But enough of them are that some of them will benefit from this training.
I live in the US, and therefore conclude that the US is doomed. Don't you watch the news?!?
It could explain why we see more matter than anti-matter. We're less than 50% of the way through time. Think of the matter/antimatter ratio as a universal progress bar...
This is already available.
If you have the money, use private schools.
If you don't have that much money, have one parent quit and homeschool.
If you can't afford one income, then you're already part of the "poor [we can't help] against their will" (Apologies to the single parents).
Or you're just blowing smoke.
Which is it?
go fix yourself a sammich
Since you're already making one sammich...
I forgot to address the final point:
only one disk needs to be rebuilt and even for a large disk that doesn't take very long.
That depends. I can clone a 120GB SATA drive in about 2 hours, if I dedicate all the IO to the clone operation. Admittedly, this is on my laptop (which peaks around 30MB/s), but it's also a dedicated sequential read from the source and write to the destination. If I try and use both disks while the cloning is occuring, the clone is slowed down significantly. I would expect that operation to drop to well below 30MB/s.
On top of that, a lot of RAID card/implementation will cap the amount of I/O that can be consumed by a rebuild. My Linux software RAID1 caps the transfer rate (I *think* around 10MB/s, but I'm kind of guessing. The trivial test I tried didn't run long enough to hit the cap, and I don't want to rebuild the big volume just for the fun of it).
All these things add up to a much longer rebuild time than a back of the envelope calculation would indicate.
RAID5 is not redundant during a single drive failure. Once the failed drive is rebuilt, it is singly redundant again.
RAID6 attempts to keep a fully redundant array even during a single drive failure. Once the failed drive is rebuilt, it doubly redundant (redundantly redundant?). 2 drive failures make a RAID6 look the same as a RAID5 with 1 drive failure.
RAID1+0 is partially redundant during a single drive failure. The downside is that it focuses the stress of rebuilding the failed drive on a single drive (it's mirror). If the mirrors are not from the same manufacturing lot, the probabilities of a 2nd failure is fairly well known. If the failed drive and it's mirror come from the same manufacturing lot, the risk of a 2nd failure (during rebuild) increase considerably.
I personally run RAID1+0, with the RAID1 part being a two way mirror. I'm debating making the RAID1 portion a 3-way mirror. Just to assuage my paranoia.
Irregardless, I'll continue to use it.
For those that missed the point, the poster is describing ZFS.
How did you change this setting? I don't recall seeing this setting in hdparm or smartcrl. Is there a WD utility for this? I don't have a need for this info, I just want to poke around. :-)
There was a story a couple years back about the RF shielding properties of non-metallic materials. I'm having a bit of trouble finding the link. IIRC, cardboard won.
Maybe they're treating the cardboard with a flame retardant?
Do we really need another class of uneducated hippy children.
I'd like to point out that the Hippies were all very well educated (in general). They were able to think for themselves, which generated the Hippy Revolution, which eventually led to <hat type="tinfoil">modern school "reforms" to prevent that from happening again</hat>. So yes, I would prefer another generation of "hippy children".
I'm not saying that modern Public Schools are bad. I'm saying that I have better alternatives available. My wife was a teacher, before she quit to be a stay at home mom and home schooler. So suddenly my 3 children are getting much less of an education than the 20+ students in her classroom?
This South Park documentary proves otherwise.
I guess my point is, where do you draw the line between "Wordsmith" and "not communicating effectively"?