pssst, there is another firewall you can download from here for free!!! Can you believe that??? But shhh! keep it quiet or they'll shut down the mirror.
* Maximum transfer rate: 150MB/sec
* Maximum number of devices: 4 (typical; controller-dependent)
* Available spindle speeds: 7200 RPM
* Typical seek time: 8.5ms
SCSI:
* Maximum transfer rate:
o LVD Ultra SCSI: 80MB/sec
o SCSI-160: 160MB/sec
o SCSI-320: 320MB/sec
* Maximum number of devices: 15
* Available spindle speeds: 7200 RPM, 10000 RPM, 15000 RPM
* Typical seek time: 4.5ms
1. 150MB/s is waaay more than a single drive can push, so it is more than sufficient.SATA is a point-to-point connection, one drive per channel. SCSI may be 320MB/s and support up to 15 devices, but that bandwidth is *shared* among all of them. By the time we have HDs that can actually deliver 150MB/s transfer rate, faster SATA will be available.
2. Maximum number of devices: that's a number you pulled out of your ass. You can have as many SATA devices as SATA ports. 3ware makes nice 12-port RAID controllers.
3. Spindle speed & seek time are the properties of the *hard drive*, not the *interface* (Do you understand the difference?). A SCSI and SATA HD with otherwise identical specs will have the same performance. Also, there are 10000RPM SATA HDs -- the WD Raptors, though they are not very cost-effective. If reasonably-priced 10K and 15K RPM SATA drives are released, they will totally kill SCSI market (which is, I suspect, the main reason they are not available).
The title of the article is sensational enough that I clicked through to read it only to see that it is written by none other than Maureen O'Gara. Well that, and a whole bunch of ads, some disguised as stories. Then I wondered how the fuck did this troll make it to slashdot? Oh right, to increase the banner ad revenue. Judging by the comments, it worked! It's amazing how gullible people are.
On a side note, we should be able to moderate stories, kuro5hin-style. That would cut down on the amount of crap, stupid/. tech support, and dupes. Clearly/. editors don't care about the quality of this site, so give it to the community.
Shit like this is precisely why I'm building myself a mythtv box. Better quality, unlimited space, no monthly fees, easy networking, easy CD/DVD burning, etc.
So far MS released source for two bits of technology that is absolutely useless to Linux. How about something useful for a change: doc file format. That would be very useful -- it would allow Open Office to be 100% compatible with MS Office. And you don't even have to release any source, just the specs.
Of course this will never happen because the whole purpose of this "open source" work is so that Microsoft can say "look, I'm supporting these hippies", when in fact what they released has no effect on Microsoft business or Open Source movement.
PostgreSQL supports replication BUT replication is absolutely useless as a failover mechanism because it is asynchronous. That is, when you commit a transaction, you cannnot be sure if/when it gets propagated to the slaves. For true failover you need distributed transactions. Neither MySQL nor PostgreSQL support them, but curiously, Firebird does.
It is not in Microsoft's interests to buy SCO. When SCO's lawsuit crashes and burns (it will take a while but it is inevitable), SCO will become a HUGE liability. IBM, RedHat, Novell, as well as any other Linux company, could then go after Microsoft for damages and put a significant dent in their $50 billion warchest. That is why Microsoft want to keep SCO at arm's length and downplay its involvement in the scam.
From this description, table spaces seem pretty pointless to me (i.e. writing tables to different disks). RAID already does this for you. So, anyone? What's the point?
There is improved port management. It will no longer be up to the application to close ports after it is finished. Before, if a developer left out the closing routine or the application crashed, a port could remain open and leave XP open to attack. SP2 encourages port management with an application white list that only a user with administrator privileges can alter. Placing an application (such as a peer-to-peer program) on the white list causes ports to be managed automatically. Such applications can also now be run as a regular user rather than needing local administrator privileges to open ports in ICF.
So let me get this straight: right now, if a process crashes, it leaves a port open??? And you need administrator privileges to even open a port??? Windows is a bigger piece of shit than I thought!
That's a difficult question to answer without knowing something of your setup. How are the spindles organized--SAN, individual file servers NFS cross-mounting, or what? Which OSes are you running? Also, how much money are you able to spend to resolve this problem?
We have a bunch of netapp/bluearc filers and a single symlink tree that distributes data across them, so it's NFS. Render nodes run Linux. I have no experience with SAN. Can you point me to more info?
... but it was rejected. How do you deal with terabytes of data (50+ TB), all in a single directory tree, all must be accessible to every node? This is larger than what you can store on a single filer. Also, for performance reasons, the data must be separated across multiple filers. Currently we use lots of symlinks to tie it all together into a single logical directory tree, but that's a really ugly solution. There's got to be a better way. Right? Anyone?
OK, what's the deal with LGA-755? Pins on the motherboard? How is it supposed to work? And why??? (the ever changing sockets is one of the things that pisses me off about intel).
PCI-Express 1x. What's the speed? (not much from the looks of it) and what's the advantage over plain old PCI? I'm assuming we will see boards with more than one 16x slot at some point, which would be useful for RAID controllers, gigabit ethernet, and other high bandwidth stuff. But what's the point of 1x slots? Plain PCI works just fine.
BTX. Again, why? And who the fuck came up with this stupid name?
aha! So that's what delayed the release of windows for amd64: it was not compatible with old viruses. Now that this obstacle has been overcome, how long until the release?
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's volume license forbids the OEMs to put anything but windows on a computer. Just ask BeOS guys about it.
And where the fuck is windows x86-64 edition?
Maybe this will give people the reason to obsolete PHP and use a real language for server-side scripting.
They already did. Except they elected Mickey Mouse and Donald Rumsfeld.
How is this a rant? Are you saying the problems they list don't exist?
I like that site cause it contains no spin: it just lists the facts and provides references to the documentation. Is it the facts that bother you?
right here
pssst, there is another firewall you can download from here for free!!! Can you believe that??? But shhh! keep it quiet or they'll shut down the mirror.
1. 150MB/s is waaay more than a single drive can push, so it is more than sufficient.SATA is a point-to-point connection, one drive per channel. SCSI may be 320MB/s and support up to 15 devices, but that bandwidth is *shared* among all of them. By the time we have HDs that can actually deliver 150MB/s transfer rate, faster SATA will be available.
2. Maximum number of devices: that's a number you pulled out of your ass. You can have as many SATA devices as SATA ports. 3ware makes nice 12-port RAID controllers.
3. Spindle speed & seek time are the properties of the *hard drive*, not the *interface* (Do you understand the difference?). A SCSI and SATA HD with otherwise identical specs will have the same performance. Also, there are 10000RPM SATA HDs -- the WD Raptors, though they are not very cost-effective. If reasonably-priced 10K and 15K RPM SATA drives are released, they will totally kill SCSI market (which is, I suspect, the main reason they are not available).
MS-DOS is not dead. It just smells funny.
Mozilla 1.6 dies when trying to view www.georgewbush.com. Tried it 5 times. I guess that's cause only terrorists use mozilla. Everyone knows that!
The title of the article is sensational enough that I clicked through to read it only to see that it is written by none other than Maureen O'Gara. Well that, and a whole bunch of ads, some disguised as stories. Then I wondered how the fuck did this troll make it to slashdot? Oh right, to increase the banner ad revenue. Judging by the comments, it worked! It's amazing how gullible people are.
/. tech support, and dupes. Clearly /. editors don't care about the quality of this site, so give it to the community.
On a side note, we should be able to moderate stories, kuro5hin-style. That would cut down on the amount of crap, stupid
Shit like this is precisely why I'm building myself a mythtv box. Better quality, unlimited space, no monthly fees, easy networking, easy CD/DVD burning, etc.
So far MS released source for two bits of technology that is absolutely useless to Linux. How about something useful for a change: doc file format. That would be very useful -- it would allow Open Office to be 100% compatible with MS Office. And you don't even have to release any source, just the specs.
Of course this will never happen because the whole purpose of this "open source" work is so that Microsoft can say "look, I'm supporting these hippies", when in fact what they released has no effect on Microsoft business or Open Source movement.
I have a chronic fatigue syndrome too. Or maybe I'm just lazy. Uhhmm... never mind.
I wonder how they'll deal with refunds... :-)
PostgreSQL supports replication BUT replication is absolutely useless as a failover mechanism because it is asynchronous. That is, when you commit a transaction, you cannnot be sure if/when it gets propagated to the slaves. For true failover you need distributed transactions. Neither MySQL nor PostgreSQL support them, but curiously, Firebird does.
As far as I'm concerned, the only truly missing feature is distributed transactions. Are there any plans to add them any time soon?
It is not in Microsoft's interests to buy SCO. When SCO's lawsuit crashes and burns (it will take a while but it is inevitable), SCO will become a HUGE liability. IBM, RedHat, Novell, as well as any other Linux company, could then go after Microsoft for damages and put a significant dent in their $50 billion warchest. That is why Microsoft want to keep SCO at arm's length and downplay its involvement in the scam.
From this description, table spaces seem pretty pointless to me (i.e. writing tables to different disks). RAID already does this for you. So, anyone? What's the point?
... where are distributed transactions? Is that even planned? That's the one feature I would love to see.
So let me get this straight: right now, if a process crashes, it leaves a port open??? And you need administrator privileges to even open a port??? Windows is a bigger piece of shit than I thought!
We have a bunch of netapp/bluearc filers and a single symlink tree that distributes data across them, so it's NFS. Render nodes run Linux. I have no experience with SAN. Can you point me to more info?
... but it was rejected. How do you deal with terabytes of data (50+ TB), all in a single directory tree, all must be accessible to every node? This is larger than what you can store on a single filer. Also, for performance reasons, the data must be separated across multiple filers. Currently we use lots of symlinks to tie it all together into a single logical directory tree, but that's a really ugly solution. There's got to be a better way. Right? Anyone?
OK, what's the deal with LGA-755? Pins on the motherboard? How is it supposed to work? And why??? (the ever changing sockets is one of the things that pisses me off about intel).
PCI-Express 1x. What's the speed? (not much from the looks of it) and what's the advantage over plain old PCI? I'm assuming we will see boards with more than one 16x slot at some point, which would be useful for RAID controllers, gigabit ethernet, and other high bandwidth stuff. But what's the point of 1x slots? Plain PCI works just fine.
BTX. Again, why? And who the fuck came up with this stupid name?
What are the brown slots on these SiS boards?
aha! So that's what delayed the release of windows for amd64: it was not compatible with old viruses. Now that this obstacle has been overcome, how long until the release?