Yes, that's what I mean. With regards to trying to do a slinky... honestly, I'd be happy with a swan right now. It gets the tetrahedron, finally, and the cube... but takes most of an hour to do it. Basically, I'm doing simulated annealing (gradient descent with a cheap hack to avoid local minima), and the problem space is just too unsmooth for it to be at all efficient. I think the solution is to find a way to smooth the problem space, rather than trying more powerful solution methods... but I'm generally dissatisfied with solutions. They either reduce to "crumple the paper" or "really, this five-sided star is a frog to me".
You're missing one thing. I got frustrated two years ago, for a variety of reasons; not the least of which was that Linux at that time just sucked on four processors. Two years later, I am more curious and more willing to invest effort. And the BSD folk asked before the Linux folk, and will almost certainly gain more valuable effort. Oh, I fully understand your point, and I realize what I said was somewhat contradictory... it's just that it's several years later and both my needs and my interests have evolved.
No, I haven't written Linux off at all. I'm simply comfortable with the current situation, and felt no need to change. Now there's motivation to change, as testing would help contribute to a project that I think is valuable, even though I don't currently use it myself. I don't doubt that Linux is a viable solution now -- HP even supports it on that hardware. I just have more curiousity than need for stability.
Most people with that much RAM have it for a reason. Presumably, anyone who would volunteer to try this (like myself) is using a box for reasonably heavy crunching in a non-critical environment; in this case, just continuing normal crunching should be good exercise for testing.
Honestly? I just installed it. Got the version on DVD from a microsoft subscription, stuck it in the (external DVD) drive, followed all the prompts, and it came up with 4GB. That's okay, since I only had 4GB installed. Out of curiousity, I grabbed my one remaining stick of ram, put it in, (transferred all my other ram from one board to the other, since the LXR needs either matched sticks or only one board of ram), and booted. 4448MB of ram. I'm pretty sure (99%) that this was Advanced Server, may have been.NET beta... but I was pretty sure that.NET beta definitely didn't do PAE.
Sounds good. I currently haven't even looked at Grid, just using multiple processes and a rather large investment in licenses.:-) Thinking of going to eight processors soon, too. I'll see if I can pick up a few more sticks of RAM and give it a try, it'll mostly depend on what the prices on ram look like this week.
Mathematica stuff. A bit of everything, my attention wanders. Statistical analysis of cellular automata, parafoil design (low speed dynamics), trying to get a way to derive origami fold lines from a 3d model, path tracing... just stuff. Generally keep two or three processors full 24 hours, and try to keep one available for when I just want an answer. My main box is an iBook 600, so performance is simply not good... the Xeon 550's (2MB cache each) are much more performant for what I do.
(a) 4GB+ on x86-32 sucks. I mean, it works, but it's a hack. x86 has a history of adding new hacks to make things work, then slowly evolving away the hacks into something workable on a longer time scale. PAE, how 4GB+ works now, was the right choice at the time; it's simply time to move beyond it, and x86-64 is it.
(b) You can get 2GB dimms now... you may be able to get 4GB dimms, haven't looked, as my system (32 slots) doesn't need more than 2GB dimms. So if you really want more ram, check to make sure you're truly maxed out; it depends on sdr/ddr and other factors, of course, but there's some potential.
Also, if anyone is interested in a machine that can play at this level, check out auction depot. I'm not associated with them, other than having gotten my LXR dirt cheap (not as cheap as the link, needless to say) there. I can't say it's a sound investment, but if you want a toy you need a winch to get upstairs, you might find this fun.
I have an HP LXR 8500 with four processors (currently) and 4GB of ram. I've been considering upgrading to 6GB for a while anyway. I'm currently using Windows 2000 advanced server on it, after being somewhat frustrated with Linux support a couple of years ago. I'd be more than willing to try out BSD, although I never have before. Is there anything I should know about this? I presume that BSD would run Mathematica fine under Linux emulation mode, as my main use of the box is just Mathematica crunching. Does FreeBSD make reasonable use of four processors? Anything else I should beware of? And anyone know a good source for cheap lxr-ready ram?
Does it feel fast enough for the work you're doing on it? If so, great. If not, address the problems directly, not through synthetic benchmarks. If you're swapping, buy more ram. If your CPU is maxing out, upgrade it. What's the big deal? It's a tool, not a dick measurer.
Yeah, and it's just coincidence that the guy's initials are "BS", right?
Re:As I've said before...
on
LCD Price Fixing?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I tend to agree... except that we said that before SODIMMs were standardized. We said that before mini-pci became common. We even said that before ACPI actually worked. Standizing laptops wholesale would never work, but they do seem to be approaching some reasonable interoperability in many ways.
Well, perhaps. But I doubt that it communicates even across intracellular distances. The bloody thing is a fungus. Are separate cells of yeast all a single individual?
Gee, I don't normally troll so blatantly, but you're an idiot. Mods, please mod this down, but not before giving me a fair hearing by reading that link of his. All the way to the painful, immature, and ignorant end.
Blech, no! Swing is about 10x faster than SWT on Macs. There is no inherent reason SWT is faster than Swing, it's just that the Swing implementations most people use (Sun and Blackice) suck rocks.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that's what I mean. With regards to trying to do a slinky... honestly, I'd be happy with a swan right now. It gets the tetrahedron, finally, and the cube... but takes most of an hour to do it. Basically, I'm doing simulated annealing (gradient descent with a cheap hack to avoid local minima), and the problem space is just too unsmooth for it to be at all efficient. I think the solution is to find a way to smooth the problem space, rather than trying more powerful solution methods... but I'm generally dissatisfied with solutions. They either reduce to "crumple the paper" or "really, this five-sided star is a frog to me".
You're missing one thing. I got frustrated two years ago, for a variety of reasons; not the least of which was that Linux at that time just sucked on four processors. Two years later, I am more curious and more willing to invest effort. And the BSD folk asked before the Linux folk, and will almost certainly gain more valuable effort. Oh, I fully understand your point, and I realize what I said was somewhat contradictory... it's just that it's several years later and both my needs and my interests have evolved.
No, I haven't written Linux off at all. I'm simply comfortable with the current situation, and felt no need to change. Now there's motivation to change, as testing would help contribute to a project that I think is valuable, even though I don't currently use it myself. I don't doubt that Linux is a viable solution now -- HP even supports it on that hardware. I just have more curiousity than need for stability.
Most people with that much RAM have it for a reason. Presumably, anyone who would volunteer to try this (like myself) is using a box for reasonably heavy crunching in a non-critical environment; in this case, just continuing normal crunching should be good exercise for testing.
Honestly? I just installed it. Got the version on DVD from a microsoft subscription, stuck it in the (external DVD) drive, followed all the prompts, and it came up with 4GB. That's okay, since I only had 4GB installed. Out of curiousity, I grabbed my one remaining stick of ram, put it in, (transferred all my other ram from one board to the other, since the LXR needs either matched sticks or only one board of ram), and booted. 4448MB of ram. I'm pretty sure (99%) that this was Advanced Server, may have been .NET beta... but I was pretty sure that .NET beta definitely didn't do PAE.
So does Advanced Server, and you can actually buy it, unlike Datacenter (which is OEM only, and basically customized for each system).
Sounds good. I currently haven't even looked at Grid, just using multiple processes and a rather large investment in licenses. :-) Thinking of going to eight processors soon, too. I'll see if I can pick up a few more sticks of RAM and give it a try, it'll mostly depend on what the prices on ram look like this week.
Mathematica stuff. A bit of everything, my attention wanders. Statistical analysis of cellular automata, parafoil design (low speed dynamics), trying to get a way to derive origami fold lines from a 3d model, path tracing... just stuff. Generally keep two or three processors full 24 hours, and try to keep one available for when I just want an answer. My main box is an iBook 600, so performance is simply not good... the Xeon 550's (2MB cache each) are much more performant for what I do.
Can anyone confirm whether this is in 5.0 currently?
(a) 4GB+ on x86-32 sucks. I mean, it works, but it's a hack. x86 has a history of adding new hacks to make things work, then slowly evolving away the hacks into something workable on a longer time scale. PAE, how 4GB+ works now, was the right choice at the time; it's simply time to move beyond it, and x86-64 is it.
(b) You can get 2GB dimms now... you may be able to get 4GB dimms, haven't looked, as my system (32 slots) doesn't need more than 2GB dimms. So if you really want more ram, check to make sure you're truly maxed out; it depends on sdr/ddr and other factors, of course, but there's some potential.
Also, if anyone is interested in a machine that can play at this level, check out auction depot. I'm not associated with them, other than having gotten my LXR dirt cheap (not as cheap as the link, needless to say) there. I can't say it's a sound investment, but if you want a toy you need a winch to get upstairs, you might find this fun.
I have an HP LXR 8500 with four processors (currently) and 4GB of ram. I've been considering upgrading to 6GB for a while anyway. I'm currently using Windows 2000 advanced server on it, after being somewhat frustrated with Linux support a couple of years ago. I'd be more than willing to try out BSD, although I never have before. Is there anything I should know about this? I presume that BSD would run Mathematica fine under Linux emulation mode, as my main use of the box is just Mathematica crunching. Does FreeBSD make reasonable use of four processors? Anything else I should beware of? And anyone know a good source for cheap lxr-ready ram?
Does it feel fast enough for the work you're doing on it? If so, great. If not, address the problems directly, not through synthetic benchmarks. If you're swapping, buy more ram. If your CPU is maxing out, upgrade it. What's the big deal? It's a tool, not a dick measurer.
Right, but that's in a combustion-based engine. Mono-propellent peroxide engines use decomposition, not combustion.
As long as they're ripe, right?
Actually, he is. So very, very alone.
Don't worry, I wasn't.
Yeah, and it's just coincidence that the guy's initials are "BS", right?
I tend to agree... except that we said that before SODIMMs were standardized. We said that before mini-pci became common. We even said that before ACPI actually worked. Standizing laptops wholesale would never work, but they do seem to be approaching some reasonable interoperability in many ways.
My god, go to Mexico, or somewhere civilized. Anything but Vermont.
Not affiliated with them, just an extremely happy customer. Check out spinserver for the best damn rackmount cases there are.
Well, perhaps. But I doubt that it communicates even across intracellular distances. The bloody thing is a fungus. Are separate cells of yeast all a single individual?
Gee, I don't normally troll so blatantly, but you're an idiot. Mods, please mod this down, but not before giving me a fair hearing by reading that link of his. All the way to the painful, immature, and ignorant end.
Blech, no! Swing is about 10x faster than SWT on Macs. There is no inherent reason SWT is faster than Swing, it's just that the Swing implementations most people use (Sun and Blackice) suck rocks.
Can you imagine trying to gzip a Stegasaurus? It's like working in Oprah's dressing room.