Actually Server 2003 X64 is the XP x64 code path with the Server specific stuff built on, remember that XP x64 came out quite a bit before Server 2003 x64 did.
You're still not going to put a firewall between PC's on a broadcast domain, the cost of such a design would be astronomical since linerate firewalls are ridiculously expensive and you'd really need a switch that could perform SPI at line rates, such a beast does not exist AFAIK.
RAID5 for transactional data IS just stupid, that's why all my database servers are SAME (Stripe And Mirror Everything) but I use vRAID5 for the OS volume on low workload servers and for bulk file storage for file servers and for the backing store for our Enterprise Content Management system. Now that I have an array with vRAID6 I've defaulted to that but I've yet to benchmark to see performance as we are still in the implementation phase.
Actually it makes a LOT more sense then most pre-existing conditions, most of those the person does not have control over, the only other common voluntary condition I can think of with similar health ramifications is smoking.
With all the fast SSD's I've tested I've found the controllers to be a bigger bottleneck than the SSD itself. I've seen 50% performance gains on the Intel x-25e's simply by hooking them to a second machine with a different controller. Even with the best performer (Intel ICH9) I still had the feeling that the controller might have been holding the drive back a bit. Haven't tried it with an ICH10 based board yet though so perhaps there's significant improvements there. (on further reading they claim to be using SAS, I'm not aware of any really high performance SAS chipsets, they all seem to be targeted at RAID's of traditional HDD's and so can't keep up with SSD, I'd really be interested in some details of their test).
Or better 10Gb FCoE (lower overhead than iSCSI). In theory with a fast enough controller they should be able to do it for reads in a RAID1 configuration.
It doesn't matter, Sun was probably NEVER competitive on a performance per $ basis, but that wasn't their target market. You bought a Sun system because you needed a large, stable, high performance system with good industry support. Sun used to be all of those, but they pissed it away through mismanagement and poor execution. Almost all AIX customer are potential Solaris customers so if IBM can sell them expensive but performant kit then Sun should be able to as well if they are operating well but they haven't been for quite some time, which I find sad as I am actually a bit of a fan of Solaris.
IBM seems to do ok keeping POWER up with and ahead of Intel/AMD. Sun just rested on their laurels and kept selling essentially the same very expensive product as the rest of the computer world was rapidly advancing around them. The only truly cool thing I saw come out of Sun was the T2 and Oracle killed it for me when they dropped the per core price break when T2 started getting too fast. Perhaps now that they own Sun the pricing will go back to reasonable but I'm certainly not holding my breath.
Fujitsu's site lists the M9000 as the largest system they sell, 64x quad core with 2 way SMT gives 512 threads so there is no SPARC system bigger than that as it's also the largest SUN sells. The biggest x64 SSI I'm aware of is the ES7000 from Unisys which only goes to 96 cores so Solaris x86 doesn't have a larger system to be tested on either.
Please tell me they did something to rig the humidifier in the linked photo galary! I hate to think that you are really dumping near-condensing mist directly into the computer space.
Yeah except a lot of those engineers are going to be developing the hypervisor for the next generation of Windows Server. Of course then you just use iLo/DRAC/ASM to remote in or use an IP KVM and a port addressable PDU to power cycle the hardware. Heck I'm the guy responsible for the datacenter at my employer and I rarely go into it, it's too noisy and either too hot or too cold depending on which side of the aisle you're on. My DR equipment is colo'd with AT&T several states away and we've needed remote hands once since we moved 6+ months ago and that was for an old IBM server without ASM.
Uh, the fired employee isn't getting anywhere near MY datacenter. Unless they were one of a handful of IT employees they wouldn't have access to begin with and after termination their access would be immediate revoked.
It's like a SYN flood for most products (possible resource exhaustion) though all unpatched Vista derivatives (Vista, Server 2008, Win7, Server 2008 R2) have remote code vulnerabilities. Basically if you are upatched and someone wants to they can fill up the TCP memory on anything of yours that talks to the internet and knock that service or device offline while requiring very little resources on their part.
One of the things being talked about at the federal level is a 'type' certification where a reactor design would be certified and then they could be built like any other mass produced product. This is similar to how airplanes are certified and would go a LONG way towards reducing costs.
Most likely because the municipality taxes the plant for property tax which in a small community can mean there is no need to tax anyone else, not to mention local high paying jobs. I know one community here in NE Ohio has some of the best school facilities in the state due to having a plant in the city.
Since I already have the worst run old nuke plant in the country (David Besse, they found a football sized hole in the reactor vessel) upwind of me I say go for it, safety can't be any worse and it's likely to significantly improve the air quality around here.
What about the employee who just got fired who sets off an IP walk that crashes every file server? What about the employee that gets the malware of the day and it includes the ability for the 0wner to launch this attack inside your LAN? There's a lot more potential for abuse than just the prankster on the helpdesk deciding he wants to create some havoc.
Actually the headline is very misleading and that's bad. This affects SMB2 which is in Vista and Server 2008 as well, that means every Server 2008 system is likely vulnerable to a LAN based DoS attack.
More like a diesel locomotive, more absolute power burned but significantly better MIPS/Watt. If the ARM architecture gave better MIPS/Watt then you'd see supercomputers based on it, you don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually Server 2003 X64 is the XP x64 code path with the Server specific stuff built on, remember that XP x64 came out quite a bit before Server 2003 x64 did.
Wow, stating facts is now considered trolling?
You're still not going to put a firewall between PC's on a broadcast domain, the cost of such a design would be astronomical since linerate firewalls are ridiculously expensive and you'd really need a switch that could perform SPI at line rates, such a beast does not exist AFAIK.
Actually if you RTFA they are using the recently released 6Gb SAS spec.
RAID5 for transactional data IS just stupid, that's why all my database servers are SAME (Stripe And Mirror Everything) but I use vRAID5 for the OS volume on low workload servers and for bulk file storage for file servers and for the backing store for our Enterprise Content Management system. Now that I have an array with vRAID6 I've defaulted to that but I've yet to benchmark to see performance as we are still in the implementation phase.
Actually it makes a LOT more sense then most pre-existing conditions, most of those the person does not have control over, the only other common voluntary condition I can think of with similar health ramifications is smoking.
IOmeter 50GB file, 100% random 4KB writes. We maxed at ~18k IOPS.
With all the fast SSD's I've tested I've found the controllers to be a bigger bottleneck than the SSD itself. I've seen 50% performance gains on the Intel x-25e's simply by hooking them to a second machine with a different controller. Even with the best performer (Intel ICH9) I still had the feeling that the controller might have been holding the drive back a bit. Haven't tried it with an ICH10 based board yet though so perhaps there's significant improvements there. (on further reading they claim to be using SAS, I'm not aware of any really high performance SAS chipsets, they all seem to be targeted at RAID's of traditional HDD's and so can't keep up with SSD, I'd really be interested in some details of their test).
Or better 10Gb FCoE (lower overhead than iSCSI). In theory with a fast enough controller they should be able to do it for reads in a RAID1 configuration.
It doesn't matter, Sun was probably NEVER competitive on a performance per $ basis, but that wasn't their target market. You bought a Sun system because you needed a large, stable, high performance system with good industry support. Sun used to be all of those, but they pissed it away through mismanagement and poor execution. Almost all AIX customer are potential Solaris customers so if IBM can sell them expensive but performant kit then Sun should be able to as well if they are operating well but they haven't been for quite some time, which I find sad as I am actually a bit of a fan of Solaris.
IBM seems to do ok keeping POWER up with and ahead of Intel/AMD. Sun just rested on their laurels and kept selling essentially the same very expensive product as the rest of the computer world was rapidly advancing around them. The only truly cool thing I saw come out of Sun was the T2 and Oracle killed it for me when they dropped the per core price break when T2 started getting too fast. Perhaps now that they own Sun the pricing will go back to reasonable but I'm certainly not holding my breath.
Fujitsu's site lists the M9000 as the largest system they sell, 64x quad core with 2 way SMT gives 512 threads so there is no SPARC system bigger than that as it's also the largest SUN sells. The biggest x64 SSI I'm aware of is the ES7000 from Unisys which only goes to 96 cores so Solaris x86 doesn't have a larger system to be tested on either.
The nano is popular for people to workout with, it's also significantly cheaper than the touch.
Please tell me they did something to rig the humidifier in the linked photo galary! I hate to think that you are really dumping near-condensing mist directly into the computer space.
Yeah except a lot of those engineers are going to be developing the hypervisor for the next generation of Windows Server. Of course then you just use iLo/DRAC/ASM to remote in or use an IP KVM and a port addressable PDU to power cycle the hardware. Heck I'm the guy responsible for the datacenter at my employer and I rarely go into it, it's too noisy and either too hot or too cold depending on which side of the aisle you're on. My DR equipment is colo'd with AT&T several states away and we've needed remote hands once since we moved 6+ months ago and that was for an old IBM server without ASM.
Uh, the fired employee isn't getting anywhere near MY datacenter. Unless they were one of a handful of IT employees they wouldn't have access to begin with and after termination their access would be immediate revoked.
It's like a SYN flood for most products (possible resource exhaustion) though all unpatched Vista derivatives (Vista, Server 2008, Win7, Server 2008 R2) have remote code vulnerabilities. Basically if you are upatched and someone wants to they can fill up the TCP memory on anything of yours that talks to the internet and knock that service or device offline while requiring very little resources on their part.
One of the things being talked about at the federal level is a 'type' certification where a reactor design would be certified and then they could be built like any other mass produced product. This is similar to how airplanes are certified and would go a LONG way towards reducing costs.
Most likely because the municipality taxes the plant for property tax which in a small community can mean there is no need to tax anyone else, not to mention local high paying jobs. I know one community here in NE Ohio has some of the best school facilities in the state due to having a plant in the city.
Since I already have the worst run old nuke plant in the country (David Besse, they found a football sized hole in the reactor vessel) upwind of me I say go for it, safety can't be any worse and it's likely to significantly improve the air quality around here.
What about the employee who just got fired who sets off an IP walk that crashes every file server? What about the employee that gets the malware of the day and it includes the ability for the 0wner to launch this attack inside your LAN? There's a lot more potential for abuse than just the prankster on the helpdesk deciding he wants to create some havoc.
Try it against a Server 2008 lab server with file shares, I'll bet that it will BSOD.
Actually the headline is very misleading and that's bad. This affects SMB2 which is in Vista and Server 2008 as well, that means every Server 2008 system is likely vulnerable to a LAN based DoS attack.
No, Gulftown is slated for socket 1366 next year. Of course it's list price is $1500 so whether you will want to upgrade to it is questionable.
More like a diesel locomotive, more absolute power burned but significantly better MIPS/Watt. If the ARM architecture gave better MIPS/Watt then you'd see supercomputers based on it, you don't.