I'm here at IBM-RTP, where we will *also* be closing up tomorrow.. no, it's not all of IBM, but it *is* the single largest IBM site on the planet, as well as being manufacturing for all of IBM PC (servers, desktops, etc)
Was it an indexed field? If so, the search should have been binary on == and possibly binary on LIKE (not sure though)... Any int fields you search on should definitely be indexed:)
If read-only, raid 1+0 allows striping reads across all physical drives, so you get the performance benefit of raid0 with the mirroring (and drive death survival) of raid1. If you don't care about data redundancy (you might want to care about making sure your site is available), a pure raid0 will still get data off drives faster than a single drive.
Of course, I'm a strong software raid advocate, with a switch to hardware when it's cheaper to offload those cycles to other chips rather than speed up (or increase the number of) main processor(s).
Sites that have a lot of writes, OTOH, have to balance data amount available vs. performance (etc) wrt raid1, 5, or 10.
Ya know, I truly find it hilarious that people believe hardware raid has some huge benefit...
I've been using software raid, both over normal SCSI and hardware raid, in production servers for quite some time... hardware raid, even fast ones like DAC1164P, are going to get smoked in something like RAID5...
Think about it... do you want to do 64k XOR's 32-bits at a time on a single strongarm 233 (at best) or half/full cache lines at a time using SIMD on an SMP?
The best approach so far has been to allow hardware to handle raid0 for simple striping and disk management, and leave the XOR's and large chunks done in your main processors (after all, this is all streaming to prefetching helps a good bit) if you can afford the cycles.
Refer to linux-raid archives and my performance postings there with any questions
Sun's attempt (depending on which EE Times article you're reading, either a good one or one too rushed out the door) at a VLIW/EPIC target architecture for Java code... eet.com search on MAJC should turn up one or two informative articles.
Second, realize 0+1 (typically 1+0, or RAID 10) only gives you half of total physical space in effective space.... sometimes you can afford that, sometimes you can't... and you still generate the scsi bus loads of the full drive set:)
In the very typical (especially in these situations) case of reading the databases, it's worth agreeing that 1+0 becomes 0+0 (since you can split reads across a raid1, assuming no failed drives)
Last, as a side note to the mysql part, try to use isamchk (if the db server can have any down time) for pre-sorting your database instead of doing the sorting as part of your SQL
Ya know, I've always wondered why some rpm couldn't be made that would install the basics needed by Debian, mv some stuff around, then do the necessary apt-get magic... hmmm
I, for one, would love neat little ways to move back and forth between distros w/o new installs
Re:OC'ing... Why is the clock multiplier locked ?
on
Athlon Reviews
·
· Score: 1
I don't really mind the locking at this point, as I'd rather see the K7 core get out there and get proven before people start pushing its clock rate.
Remember, the P6 core had a good workout in Real Life before it got pushed into common OC-land.
Just to make sure people know it's available, there's always irc.linux.com(irc.openprojects.net) which will have good (if not great) Linux help at #linuxhelp and #linpeople
"on *it*" may imply a level of cooperation that I fear isn't really happening. This, combined with the ability to have more eyes looking at current work, would certainly make it nice (imho) to have at least a cvs read-only server with their current work...
I had problems using the rpm's coming from an old E 0.15 daily snap and gnome 0.99.3 but clearing out all the old E, gnome, and their libs (strinlist, libFnLib, libesd*, etc), killing all my home dirs dotfiles that related (.gnome,.enlightenment dir,.ee, etc) then starting over with a rpm -U of everything with --nodeps and a simple gnome-session after a few utils in my.xinitrc (first time I spawned gnome-session... doh!) and everything has worked beautifully.
Slashdot Mirror
Wax up those surfboards, d00d!
And you thought the "Point Break" wave was impressive...
True... it's the result of leaving out the http://
http://members.hyperlink.net.au/~chart/download/ve ndors.txt
1279 Transmeta Corp
I'm here at IBM-RTP, where we will *also* be closing up tomorrow.. no, it's not all of IBM, but it *is* the single largest IBM site on the planet, as well as being manufacturing for all of IBM PC (servers, desktops, etc)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=99/09/11/10722 6&cid=53
Based on the zebra.net address, I'd say Alabama, which is very US (well, as long as you don't ask anyone on the wrong side of the Mason-Dixon :)
Not him either, but in one window
/tmp :)
while true; do wget -r 209.207.224.40; done
and the other window, same dir
while true; do rm -rf 209.207.224.40; sleep 5; done
Simply to keep from filling my
For those that can't keep up with lkml, when will the "real" software raid 0.90 stuff make it into a vanilla kernel? What's left holding it up?
Do you see the kernel split into desktop and server version occuring? Torvalds to server and you heading desktop would seem a good fit.
Actually, ext2 handles bigger than 2GB on Alpha.
It handles up to signed 32-bit on 32-bit arch and signed 64-bit on 64-bit arch.
With LFS patches, it handles up to signed 64-bit even on 32-bit arch (which is how my dual PII is hosting a 19GB MySQL DB that exists in ext2)
Was it an indexed field? If so, the search should have been binary on == and possibly binary on LIKE (not sure though)... Any int fields you search on should definitely be indexed :)
Nothing could be further from correct.
If read-only, raid 1+0 allows striping reads across all physical drives, so you get the performance benefit of raid0 with the mirroring (and drive death survival) of raid1. If you don't care about data redundancy (you might want to care about making sure your site is available), a pure raid0 will still get data off drives faster than a single drive.
Of course, I'm a strong software raid advocate, with a switch to hardware when it's cheaper to offload those cycles to other chips rather than speed up (or increase the number of) main processor(s).
Sites that have a lot of writes, OTOH, have to balance data amount available vs. performance (etc) wrt raid1, 5, or 10.
Ya know, I truly find it hilarious that people believe hardware raid has some huge benefit...
I've been using software raid, both over normal SCSI and hardware raid, in production servers for quite some time... hardware raid, even fast ones like DAC1164P, are going to get smoked in something like RAID5...
Think about it... do you want to do 64k XOR's 32-bits at a time on a single strongarm 233 (at best) or half/full cache lines at a time using SIMD on an SMP?
The best approach so far has been to allow hardware to handle raid0 for simple striping and disk management, and leave the XOR's and large chunks done in your main processors (after all, this is all streaming to prefetching helps a good bit) if you can afford the cycles.
Refer to linux-raid archives and my performance postings there with any questions
Sun's attempt (depending on which EE Times article you're reading, either a good one or one too rushed out the door) at a VLIW/EPIC target architecture for Java code... eet.com search on MAJC should turn up one or two informative articles.
First, PLEASE don't point people to that horrible howto... as soon as Linus will accept the real software raid versions (and howto) available over at:
http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/kernel.org/pub/land
http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/Second, realize 0+1 (typically 1+0, or RAID 10) only gives you half of total physical space in effective space.... sometimes you can afford that, sometimes you can't... and you still generate the scsi bus loads of the full drive set :)
In the very typical (especially in these situations) case of reading the databases, it's worth agreeing that 1+0 becomes 0+0 (since you can split reads across a raid1, assuming no failed drives)
Last, as a side note to the mysql part, try to use isamchk (if the db server can have any down time) for pre-sorting your database instead of doing the sorting as part of your SQL
No kidding...
hopefully he's not one of the idiots that
believe 0.9999... (repeating infinitely)
and 1 are two different numbers
zero point nine bar equals one
Your mistake: exp(j*x)=cos(x)+j*sin(x)
so...
-2*exp(j*PI) =
-2*(cos(PI) + j*sin(PI)) =
-2*(-1 + j*0) =
2
So it was his two cents, and you fail Math.
Ya know, I've always wondered why some rpm couldn't be made that would install the basics needed by Debian, mv some stuff around, then do the necessary apt-get magic... hmmm
I, for one, would love neat little ways to move back and forth between distros w/o new installs
I don't really mind the locking at this point, as I'd rather see the K7 core get out there and get proven before people start pushing its clock rate.
Remember, the P6 core had a good workout in Real Life before it got pushed into common OC-land.
pssst buddy... he quit Compaq already :)
jon@valinux.com iirc
Just to make sure people know it's available, there's always irc.linux.com(irc.openprojects.net) which will have good (if not great) Linux help at #linuxhelp and #linpeople
"on *it*" may imply a level of cooperation
that I fear isn't really happening. This,
combined with the ability to have more eyes
looking at current work, would certainly make
it nice (imho) to have at least a cvs read-only
server with their current work...
Does this mean that the Linux port can start
occuring out in the "Open" now? Hmmmm?
I had problems using the rpm's coming from an old E 0.15 daily snap and gnome 0.99.3 but clearing out all the old E, gnome, and their libs (strinlist, libFnLib, libesd*, etc), killing all my home dirs dotfiles that related (.gnome, .enlightenment dir, .ee, etc) then starting over with a rpm -U of everything with --nodeps and a simple gnome-session after a few utils in my .xinitrc (first time I spawned gnome-session... doh!) and everything has worked beautifully.
1) Millennium
2) Millennial
3) starts 01/01/2001, midnight,
366 days removed from 01/01/2000