You could have tight capacity limitations on the existing hardware and you can't setup new servers fast enough, so having even one of a HA cluster can severely impact the cluster's throughput.
Then you're not HA. You're Mostly-A.
Its obviously not the situation you want to be in, but it does happen.
Absolutely. And the proper response is to restore HA capabilities, not mess around slapping bandaids onto a broken leg.
If your SLA is 24/7, then any dependence on a single server means you can't deliver it. *Why* that server goes down is utterly irrelevant to that fact.
The question is primarily, how do you not have the means? Seriously. Its pretty damn easy to find charities, jobs, etc. if you are willing and really, really need it.
Born addicted to crack. Never known anything except a mother who hates me and any one of hundred men who could (or couldn't) be daddy. Can't write, can barely read, and only string a sentence together thanks to Sesame Street. The nicest clothes I own are a ripped T-shirt and some dirty jeans. I smell because I can only bathe once every few days, I'm missing 1/4 of my teeth because I've never been to a dentist and my mum's been giving me coke since I was 5. I've got an undiagnosed case of dyslexia and I'm borderline schizophrenic.
How good do you think my chances of getting a job - any job - are ?
Yeah, living within your means might mean you can't afford to take that vacation to Cancun, [...]
You appear to be talking about born-and-raised middle-class folks living marginally beyond their means because they aspired a bit too high. The relevant topic of discussion is the poor and destitute. The folks living in alleys, not downgrading from a 5-bedroom home to a 3-bedroom apartment. People for whom a "vacation to Cancun" is a lifetime dream, not something they have to put off for 12 months.
[...] yeah, living within your means might mean your meals are ramen noodles and PB+J sandwiches.
Sorry, mum kicked me out on my 16th birthday so she could move to a 1 bedroom flat. Even if I wanted to move back in and watch her turn tricks all night, I couldn't.
Live within your means and that won't happen.
My means are barely enough to afford food and board, because arseholes like you think I'm lazy for spending 12 hours a day mopping floors and think I should only be paid $50 to do it. In the middle of New York City.
Yeah, there are a few people who just were simply unlucky, but that is very, very few and thats why private charities exist that don't steal money out of my paycheck.
Bullshit.
The number of people who *want* to live a bare existence - and don't kid yourself that welfare, or charity is anything more than a bare existence - is minscule. No-one is living the dream on welfare, despite what you might believe, and it sure as hell isn't the majority.
Hell that sounds like some people's daily commute.
Anyone commuting 6 hours a day is an idiot - even people using public transport (though that's marginally less stupid). Hell, anyone commuting more than 2 hours a day (door-to-door) needs to seriously reconsider their priorities.
Further, people generally don't commute in a scenario where their chances of dying are far greater doing so rather than working at home.
While I like the idea of tele-surgery a 3 hour wait is acceptable. What is not acceptable is a wait of days for an important surgery when minutes count.
There are numerous situations where a 3 hour wait can be lethal, or at least seriously debilitating. Yes, even outside the big city.
Nah. It'd still be a terrible idea, even though it would also be the best option. (This is not a unique combination. "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried." - Winston Churchill)
In the real world, "terrible" is a relative, not absolute measure. When your choices are remote surgery over the internet, or dying, remote surgery is in no way a "terrible" option.
"an application aborted teh shutdown" which the user initiated? Really is this what happens? If so, it reminds me of Windows 3.x an their cooperative tasking method of running where the applications are in control, not the operating system. That is and was a very flawed design for a general purpose computing platform.
Quite the opposite. A shutdown is a destructive behaviour, and destructive behaviours should _absolutely_ be confirmed by the user before executing, unless explicitly indicated otherwise.
so, australia seems to think that releasing info that has nothing to do with them is illegal?
No. The law he may have broken is related to aiding the enemy in a time of war - ie. Treason - remember Australia is mixed up in this Afghanistan/Iran mess as well.
However one might feel about this case, the law itself is not "stoopid".
What's sad is that you think the answer to people who live in poor conditions is not to help them raise themselves out of those positions [...]
Help them how ? Education so they can gain the skills necessary to work ? Food and shelter so they don't need to steal to survive ? Medical care so they don't die young, be bankrupted by an unfortunate medical condition, or relegated to "crazy and homeless" by an easily treatable mental condition ?
Or just cut taxes (that they don't earn enough to pay anyway) ?
Food stamps, higher minimum wage and unemployment "benefits" only serve to give to the poor that which was taken from people who actually planned ahead.
How do you "plan ahead" when you've never had the means to do so ?
Explain to me why the hell I should have to pay for Joe the Bum's food?
For when *you're* "Joe the Bum* because you were unlucky enough to be rendered bankrupt and homeless.
So because I bust my ass working, studied my ass off in college and actually had a sane financial plan I should be "punished" for that and Joe the Bum rewarded? I don't see the logic in that...
The logic is where you don't automatically assume anyone who isn't wealthy and successful is worthless and lazy.
There is a story of a fellow who flew a Piper Cub who removed the seats. He taxied to the runway, and because there were no seats he couldn't see over the dash, so he didn't see the van parked on the runway. He hit the van. He died. The family sued Piper Aircraft.
This is only a valid argument if they won. Did they ?
If planned restarts of individual servers are *not* "LOW COST" operations, you should probably concentrate on fixing your architecture and procedures, rather than delving into kernel mangling.
Hell, it's reasonable to imagine that in-place upgrades could even become MORE stable than reboot upgrades (eventually).
Why ? How is starting from an inherently less known and more volatile state ever going to be "MORE stable" ?
If that happens, you'd have to be more than a fool to continue rebooting--you'd have to be some kind of technical cargo-cultist, unwilling to offend the Machine Gods by departing from the correct rituals. (There will probably be at least a few of these people--I know some of them, I think.)
All systems develop runtime cruft over time and benefit from a reboot. To say nothing of how useful planned reboots are for confirming that your systems will recover from the _unplanned_ ones.
NTFS has a lot of problems with performance (like a tendency to fragment seemingly while the HDD is still en-route in plastic package). It doesn't support deduplication, symbolic links to files (yep, it's done above the VFS layer in Windows Vista), no support for RAIDs, no support for dynamic resizing, etc. It's also SLOW. NTFS is an old filesystem, it was conceived in the beginning of 90-s when journaling was the state of the art. But now the state of the art has moved far far away.
These are pretty much all wrong and/or irrelevant.
* *Actual* performance problems due to fragmentation - outside of a few corner cases - are basically nonexistant.
* Deduplication outside of SAN and NAS-level appliances is basically nonexistant, so saying that makes it obselete seems ridiculous.
* Can you explain what you mean by "it's done above the VFS layer" ? Surely you're not trying to argue symlinks and shortcuts are the same thing ?
* RAID is handled at the block device level, not the filesystem level (and many, many people believe putting RAID into the "filesystem" is an architecturally bad thing, so that's hardly something it can be plainly criticised for).
* NTFS filesystems can both grow and shrink.
* Do you have a source for up-to-date benchmarks ?
NTFS is an old filesystem, it was conceived in the beginning of 90-s when journaling was the state of the art. But now the state of the art has moved far far away.
NTFS today is not the same NTFS that was in Windows NT 3.1.
Move to the back and do it where you're not the center of attention.
She's only the centre of attention when voyeurs like you make her so.
I am fully sympathetic to the fact that some people may feel the need to stare at exposed boobies, though I sometimes wonder how they deal with all those [semi-]naked statues around the place. I have zero tolerance for those who fail to recognise it's their problem, not the boob owner's.
Unlike SCO (new and old) however, Oracle always did actually produce something real.
SCO had a couple of very real UNIX products out there in the '90s, especially back when Linux was still an unsupported toy. I was even unlucky enough (from an ease of use perspective they made Solaris look like Ubuntu) to have to look after a bunch of them in a previous job - though by the time I'd left I'd gotten them about 90% migrated to a combination of RHEL and WBL.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm all for education. He said nothing about education though just more welfare, welfare, welfare.
Er, what ? The *first thing* I said was education:
Help them how ? Education so they can gain the skills necessary to work ?
You could have tight capacity limitations on the existing hardware and you can't setup new servers fast enough, so having even one of a HA cluster can severely impact the cluster's throughput.
Then you're not HA. You're Mostly-A.
Its obviously not the situation you want to be in, but it does happen.
Absolutely. And the proper response is to restore HA capabilities, not mess around slapping bandaids onto a broken leg.
If your SLA is 24/7, then any dependence on a single server means you can't deliver it. *Why* that server goes down is utterly irrelevant to that fact.
The question is primarily, how do you not have the means? Seriously. Its pretty damn easy to find charities, jobs, etc. if you are willing and really, really need it.
Born addicted to crack. Never known anything except a mother who hates me and any one of hundred men who could (or couldn't) be daddy. Can't write, can barely read, and only string a sentence together thanks to Sesame Street. The nicest clothes I own are a ripped T-shirt and some dirty jeans. I smell because I can only bathe once every few days, I'm missing 1/4 of my teeth because I've never been to a dentist and my mum's been giving me coke since I was 5. I've got an undiagnosed case of dyslexia and I'm borderline schizophrenic.
How good do you think my chances of getting a job - any job - are ?
Yeah, living within your means might mean you can't afford to take that vacation to Cancun, [...]
You appear to be talking about born-and-raised middle-class folks living marginally beyond their means because they aspired a bit too high. The relevant topic of discussion is the poor and destitute. The folks living in alleys, not downgrading from a 5-bedroom home to a 3-bedroom apartment. People for whom a "vacation to Cancun" is a lifetime dream, not something they have to put off for 12 months.
[...] yeah, living within your means might mean your meals are ramen noodles and PB+J sandwiches.
Sorry, mum kicked me out on my 16th birthday so she could move to a 1 bedroom flat. Even if I wanted to move back in and watch her turn tricks all night, I couldn't.
Live within your means and that won't happen.
My means are barely enough to afford food and board, because arseholes like you think I'm lazy for spending 12 hours a day mopping floors and think I should only be paid $50 to do it. In the middle of New York City.
Yeah, there are a few people who just were simply unlucky, but that is very, very few and thats why private charities exist that don't steal money out of my paycheck.
Bullshit.
The number of people who *want* to live a bare existence - and don't kid yourself that welfare, or charity is anything more than a bare existence - is minscule. No-one is living the dream on welfare, despite what you might believe, and it sure as hell isn't the majority.
Hell that sounds like some people's daily commute.
Anyone commuting 6 hours a day is an idiot - even people using public transport (though that's marginally less stupid). Hell, anyone commuting more than 2 hours a day (door-to-door) needs to seriously reconsider their priorities.
Further, people generally don't commute in a scenario where their chances of dying are far greater doing so rather than working at home.
While I like the idea of tele-surgery a 3 hour wait is acceptable. What is not acceptable is a wait of days for an important surgery when minutes count.
There are numerous situations where a 3 hour wait can be lethal, or at least seriously debilitating. Yes, even outside the big city.
Nah. It'd still be a terrible idea, even though it would also be the best option. (This is not a unique combination. "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried." - Winston Churchill)
In the real world, "terrible" is a relative, not absolute measure. When your choices are remote surgery over the internet, or dying, remote surgery is in no way a "terrible" option.
When you restart the master server for the production database, what will the application servers query?
One of the other cluster nodes.
The fact that "all systems develop runtime cruft over time" is the problem.
Only in the same sense that not having world peace is the problem.
Perhaps now your rhetoric is temporarily exhausted you can answer the questions ?
Oh sure, we can argue about whether to increase this tax and decrease this tax, but the issue of why are we even taxed never gets brought up.
That's because intelligent people understand that taxes are the price paid for civilisation.
The *real* question is why some people get so much more value for their money than others.
"an application aborted teh shutdown" which the user initiated? Really is this what happens? If so, it reminds me of Windows 3.x an their cooperative tasking method of running where the applications are in control, not the operating system. That is and was a very flawed design for a general purpose computing platform.
Quite the opposite. A shutdown is a destructive behaviour, and destructive behaviours should _absolutely_ be confirmed by the user before executing, unless explicitly indicated otherwise.
so, australia seems to think that releasing info that has nothing to do with them is illegal?
No. The law he may have broken is related to aiding the enemy in a time of war - ie. Treason - remember Australia is mixed up in this Afghanistan/Iran mess as well.
However one might feel about this case, the law itself is not "stoopid".
What's sad is that you think the answer to people who live in poor conditions is not to help them raise themselves out of those positions [...]
Help them how ? Education so they can gain the skills necessary to work ? Food and shelter so they don't need to steal to survive ? Medical care so they don't die young, be bankrupted by an unfortunate medical condition, or relegated to "crazy and homeless" by an easily treatable mental condition ?
Or just cut taxes (that they don't earn enough to pay anyway) ?
Food stamps, higher minimum wage and unemployment "benefits" only serve to give to the poor that which was taken from people who actually planned ahead.
How do you "plan ahead" when you've never had the means to do so ?
Explain to me why the hell I should have to pay for Joe the Bum's food?
For when *you're* "Joe the Bum* because you were unlucky enough to be rendered bankrupt and homeless.
So because I bust my ass working, studied my ass off in college and actually had a sane financial plan I should be "punished" for that and Joe the Bum rewarded? I don't see the logic in that...
The logic is where you don't automatically assume anyone who isn't wealthy and successful is worthless and lazy.
If the alternative is a 3 hour flight to the nearest qualified surgeon you might be prepared to reconsider.
And while we're at it, has anyone EVER gotten a solution when Windows "checks online for a solution" to a crash?
Three times. Once for an application update, twice for newer drivers. All solved known issues that I was having.
I liked that quote so much, I had to look it up. According to Snopes, Jed Babbin said that.
Made even more hilarious since they're both American.
There is a story of a fellow who flew a Piper Cub who removed the seats. He taxied to the runway, and because there were no seats he couldn't see over the dash, so he didn't see the van parked on the runway. He hit the van. He died. The family sued Piper Aircraft.
This is only a valid argument if they won. Did they ?
WTF are you talking about? Kill -9 gets rid of apps if you really need too, rebooting is for windows users.
If you've never had a process that kill -9 couldn't kill, you can't have been using Linux (or any other UNIX-like system) for very long.
Rest assured it's quite possible to get a system into a situation where a reboot is _required_.
2) Reboot upgrades are a LOW COST operation.
If planned restarts of individual servers are *not* "LOW COST" operations, you should probably concentrate on fixing your architecture and procedures, rather than delving into kernel mangling.
Hell, it's reasonable to imagine that in-place upgrades could even become MORE stable than reboot upgrades (eventually).
Why ? How is starting from an inherently less known and more volatile state ever going to be "MORE stable" ?
If that happens, you'd have to be more than a fool to continue rebooting--you'd have to be some kind of technical cargo-cultist, unwilling to offend the Machine Gods by departing from the correct rituals. (There will probably be at least a few of these people--I know some of them, I think.)
All systems develop runtime cruft over time and benefit from a reboot. To say nothing of how useful planned reboots are for confirming that your systems will recover from the _unplanned_ ones.
Let's say I'm running a high-availability server and can't stand any downtime.
if your service depends on a single server, it isn't HA. If you really can't stand any downtime your architecture is broken.
NTFS has a lot of problems with performance (like a tendency to fragment seemingly while the HDD is still en-route in plastic package). It doesn't support deduplication, symbolic links to files (yep, it's done above the VFS layer in Windows Vista), no support for RAIDs, no support for dynamic resizing, etc. It's also SLOW. NTFS is an old filesystem, it was conceived in the beginning of 90-s when journaling was the state of the art. But now the state of the art has moved far far away.
These are pretty much all wrong and/or irrelevant.
* *Actual* performance problems due to fragmentation - outside of a few corner cases - are basically nonexistant.
* Deduplication outside of SAN and NAS-level appliances is basically nonexistant, so saying that makes it obselete seems ridiculous.
* Can you explain what you mean by "it's done above the VFS layer" ? Surely you're not trying to argue symlinks and shortcuts are the same thing ?
* RAID is handled at the block device level, not the filesystem level (and many, many people believe putting RAID into the "filesystem" is an architecturally bad thing, so that's hardly something it can be plainly criticised for).
* NTFS filesystems can both grow and shrink.
* Do you have a source for up-to-date benchmarks ?
NTFS is an old filesystem, it was conceived in the beginning of 90-s when journaling was the state of the art. But now the state of the art has moved far far away.
NTFS today is not the same NTFS that was in Windows NT 3.1.
Mount a nice fast SSD as swap would be a good start. Then point your /tmp to a tmpfs.
That's not even remotely close to the same thing.
Move to the back and do it where you're not the center of attention.
She's only the centre of attention when voyeurs like you make her so.
I am fully sympathetic to the fact that some people may feel the need to stare at exposed boobies, though I sometimes wonder how they deal with all those [semi-]naked statues around the place. I have zero tolerance for those who fail to recognise it's their problem, not the boob owner's.
Why can't you take a shit in public?
Because it smells bad and is extremely unhygienic.
Or, to put it in terms your tiny brain might be able to comprehend, it bears about as much resemblance to breast feeding as it does to sweating.
I never see my hard disk data rate maxing out my connection speed, so I con't understand why all this emphasis on faster connections.
External drives - even 2.5" models - have been maxing out USB2 for years.
Unlike SCO (new and old) however, Oracle always did actually produce something real.
SCO had a couple of very real UNIX products out there in the '90s, especially back when Linux was still an unsupported toy. I was even unlucky enough (from an ease of use perspective they made Solaris look like Ubuntu) to have to look after a bunch of them in a previous job - though by the time I'd left I'd gotten them about 90% migrated to a combination of RHEL and WBL.