If you don't need to write to the drive from XP then UDF is a possibility, it's about 3x faster than even FAT16 under Vista for small files and is supported by almost all current OS's (OSX 10.5, Linux 2.6.10+, Vista/Win7, AIX, etc) so eventually it shouldn't be a problem unless you need to use it with an embedded type device. If MS asks too much for exFAT I can see embedded players supporting UDF for large filesystems.
2.6 is faster than 2.4 is faster than 2.2 for all but the most underpowered (embedded) systems. For almost all other workloads the continuing advancement of the scheduler and the removal of ever more global locks means the kernel is faster.
I have a problem with ALL of them at this point, the simply don't include enough data points or enough processes in their analysis. To take those results and claim that the sky is falling and that we are all doomed is foolhardy and sensationalist, it does no one any good least of all the reputation of climatologists. I agree that we need to do everything we can to alter our behavior and move off of fossil fuels, but I believe that as much because they will eventually run out as I do because of climatologist doomsayers.
I don't disagree wrt reducing emissions, I just think that climate models are starting to become the Microsoft Excel of the scientific community. In business we give Excel to quants and get horribly flawed models that have no relation to reality because they do not understand that there is data they are missing which their model relies upon. I think we are getting to much the same thing with climate models, they put in their handful of datapoints and tweak the model till it conforms then they run it for x years in the future and claim that is somehow a prediction for future conditions.
So they are saying we will have the opposite of the Younger Dryas no matter what we do. That may be true, and it might not be true, but I think it's a bit premature to say that our computer models are so good that they can definitively say what global conditions will be like in 1,000 years. Considering how few variables we model let alone the level of detail we have on those data points I think it's a bit foolish to say we can say much of anything definitive from our models at those type of timescales.
Hmm, VHS vs 8mm I think VHS wins. Celluloid film tends to break down after 40-60 years if not stored in exactly the right conditions, the plastic tape that VHS tapes are made of should last forever in not exposed to extremes of heat, light, or moisture and the binding agent for the magnetic material should last quite a while. I know of plenty of VHS tapes that are older than I am (I'm 30).
It's been 15 years since the last Betamax tape deck was produced yet a quick ebay search brings up 100 hits right now, most are for tapes but there are quite a few decks for sale. Laserdisc is just as old and an ebay search for laserdisc player also results in over 100 hits today. This is not to mention that there are numerous commercial services that will convert your betamax tapes to DVD for you.
Exactly, the idea that there will be LESS information surviving from our current torrent (hehe) of data is simply stupid. The fact is we have a limited view of history in the form of first person accounts because it was so expensive (both in terms of time and resources) to create a personal account of an event. Today we have say 10M blog entries about Obama's inauguration. Even if 1/10th of 1% of those are preserved that means we still have 10K accounts, how many surviving accounts of say FDR's inauguration do we have? My father has a handful of 8mm films from his childhood, my wife has boxes of VHS tapes and my kids will have hundreds of gigs of photos and movies of their childhood, each generation has more chances to save significant amounts of data because storing it is ever cheaper.
Hmm, that's funny, my local affiliate hasn't really been broadcasting the digital (HD) stream at all yet. Well technically they have but it's been at like 10W or something. They did this because they don't have enough money for either two antenna's or the power for both. The thing that sucks is they are a couple miles from the antenna farm where most of the local commercial stations are which is where our cable provider logically put their rebroadcast equipment. With their pitiful power there isn't enough signal for the cable company to pick up so I get all of the locals in HD except PBS which has the content I'd be most interested in other than sports.
And they are fast as hell as a DB server, and when the software running on them is in the range of $25K per 2 cores you'll gladly spend $1k per CPU for the fastest available processor =)
You're assuming the market has perfect information and a perfect ability to assign value to labor, both are VERY far from the truth in the real world. Thanks to all sorts of distortions in the market the fair value of labor is almost never assigned. That doesn't mean capitalism doesn't work, just that it is far from a perfect system. We simply haven't found a better system to replace it or a sufficient way to limit its shortcomings yet.
Slightly off topic but tru-2-way SUCKS, who the hell thought it was a great idea to have the cable companies software running on MY hardware? Why couldn't they just make an open standard like every other telecommunications network in the world since the old Ma Bell was forced to open up? Oh yeah, the same reason they run completely crappy software to begin with, they don't give a crap about the customer because they don't have to.
5 cards? Are you doing software RAID-5 or something? I would think parity calculations would be crippling at the kind of rates you could get out of 5 of those cards.
Dude, velociraptors aren't anywhere NEAR this, you'd need about 100 to get the same kind of I/O's per second. I know because one of my disk groups in my SAN is 110x 146GB 10k rpm drives and it gets about the same level as those shown in the benchmarks. Of course it also provides 8TB of RAID10 space which is fully redundant (I can lose an entire enclose and not lose any data due to the way the data is striped).
What kind of IOPS are those for Fusion IO? I can get about 40K from an Intel X25-e @4KB 100% random writes which impressed the hell out of me and they are closer to $20/GB than the $30/GB I've heard quoted for the Fusion IO cards.
Uh, the X25-e is about $700 and isn't nearly as fast. Of course as I found out today it's faster than the freaking $500 HP P400 raid controller in my server, plug the x25-e into the builtin SATA port on my HP desktop and I get ~40K IOPS and 170MB/s @4K 100% random writes, in the P400 I get ~16k IOPS and 65MB/s same workload.
WTF, we have had PoE for forever, you can supply up to 15.6W with current specs and up to ~22W with the next generation spec. Almost every single port on my Cisco 4500 switches in our IDF's is already supporting a device drawing either 9 or 15.6W, they aren't damaged in the least.
I was referencing this line: BTW, you can cut the power to your computer if you use hibernate instead of standby. Which definitely wasn't talking about AT systems =)
They should have an XP tech version that allows you to increase TCP connections, and import policies without Active Directory, and allow more that 10 SMB connections, and be able to update other XP boxen with its own installed Windows patches.
They do, it's called Windows Server 2003 with WSUS installed =)
I apologize, I misread your statement. You are correct that Autoplay does not need autorun.inf, what this CERT advisory is dealing with is a number of codepaths that the MS advisory does not fully account for. If you follow the MS advice AND apply that reg key you are covered.
I'm sorry but the MS solution, even if fully effective is MUCH more complicated than a 3 line reg file which permanently disables autorun unless it somehow gets re-associated with a correct event handler.
Slashdot Mirror
Good controllers do read interleaving where every other batch of reads is dispatched to a separate drive.
FORMAT X: /FS:UDF from Vista.
If you don't need to write to the drive from XP then UDF is a possibility, it's about 3x faster than even FAT16 under Vista for small files and is supported by almost all current OS's (OSX 10.5, Linux 2.6.10+, Vista/Win7, AIX, etc) so eventually it shouldn't be a problem unless you need to use it with an embedded type device. If MS asks too much for exFAT I can see embedded players supporting UDF for large filesystems.
2.6 is faster than 2.4 is faster than 2.2 for all but the most underpowered (embedded) systems. For almost all other workloads the continuing advancement of the scheduler and the removal of ever more global locks means the kernel is faster.
Which do you think is going to make the system faster, 2GB of OMG 0vercl0cked ram or 4GB of normal stock clocked memory?
I have a problem with ALL of them at this point, the simply don't include enough data points or enough processes in their analysis. To take those results and claim that the sky is falling and that we are all doomed is foolhardy and sensationalist, it does no one any good least of all the reputation of climatologists. I agree that we need to do everything we can to alter our behavior and move off of fossil fuels, but I believe that as much because they will eventually run out as I do because of climatologist doomsayers.
I don't disagree wrt reducing emissions, I just think that climate models are starting to become the Microsoft Excel of the scientific community. In business we give Excel to quants and get horribly flawed models that have no relation to reality because they do not understand that there is data they are missing which their model relies upon. I think we are getting to much the same thing with climate models, they put in their handful of datapoints and tweak the model till it conforms then they run it for x years in the future and claim that is somehow a prediction for future conditions.
So they are saying we will have the opposite of the Younger Dryas no matter what we do. That may be true, and it might not be true, but I think it's a bit premature to say that our computer models are so good that they can definitively say what global conditions will be like in 1,000 years. Considering how few variables we model let alone the level of detail we have on those data points I think it's a bit foolish to say we can say much of anything definitive from our models at those type of timescales.
Hmm, VHS vs 8mm I think VHS wins. Celluloid film tends to break down after 40-60 years if not stored in exactly the right conditions, the plastic tape that VHS tapes are made of should last forever in not exposed to extremes of heat, light, or moisture and the binding agent for the magnetic material should last quite a while. I know of plenty of VHS tapes that are older than I am (I'm 30).
It's been 15 years since the last Betamax tape deck was produced yet a quick ebay search brings up 100 hits right now, most are for tapes but there are quite a few decks for sale. Laserdisc is just as old and an ebay search for laserdisc player also results in over 100 hits today. This is not to mention that there are numerous commercial services that will convert your betamax tapes to DVD for you.
Exactly, the idea that there will be LESS information surviving from our current torrent (hehe) of data is simply stupid. The fact is we have a limited view of history in the form of first person accounts because it was so expensive (both in terms of time and resources) to create a personal account of an event. Today we have say 10M blog entries about Obama's inauguration. Even if 1/10th of 1% of those are preserved that means we still have 10K accounts, how many surviving accounts of say FDR's inauguration do we have? My father has a handful of 8mm films from his childhood, my wife has boxes of VHS tapes and my kids will have hundreds of gigs of photos and movies of their childhood, each generation has more chances to save significant amounts of data because storing it is ever cheaper.
Hmm, that's funny, my local affiliate hasn't really been broadcasting the digital (HD) stream at all yet. Well technically they have but it's been at like 10W or something. They did this because they don't have enough money for either two antenna's or the power for both. The thing that sucks is they are a couple miles from the antenna farm where most of the local commercial stations are which is where our cable provider logically put their rebroadcast equipment. With their pitiful power there isn't enough signal for the cable company to pick up so I get all of the locals in HD except PBS which has the content I'd be most interested in other than sports.
And they are fast as hell as a DB server, and when the software running on them is in the range of $25K per 2 cores you'll gladly spend $1k per CPU for the fastest available processor =)
You're assuming the market has perfect information and a perfect ability to assign value to labor, both are VERY far from the truth in the real world. Thanks to all sorts of distortions in the market the fair value of labor is almost never assigned. That doesn't mean capitalism doesn't work, just that it is far from a perfect system. We simply haven't found a better system to replace it or a sufficient way to limit its shortcomings yet.
Slightly off topic but tru-2-way SUCKS, who the hell thought it was a great idea to have the cable companies software running on MY hardware? Why couldn't they just make an open standard like every other telecommunications network in the world since the old Ma Bell was forced to open up? Oh yeah, the same reason they run completely crappy software to begin with, they don't give a crap about the customer because they don't have to.
Very Clever
/I see what you did there =)
5 cards? Are you doing software RAID-5 or something? I would think parity calculations would be crippling at the kind of rates you could get out of 5 of those cards.
Dude, velociraptors aren't anywhere NEAR this, you'd need about 100 to get the same kind of I/O's per second. I know because one of my disk groups in my SAN is 110x 146GB 10k rpm drives and it gets about the same level as those shown in the benchmarks. Of course it also provides 8TB of RAID10 space which is fully redundant (I can lose an entire enclose and not lose any data due to the way the data is striped).
What kind of IOPS are those for Fusion IO? I can get about 40K from an Intel X25-e @4KB 100% random writes which impressed the hell out of me and they are closer to $20/GB than the $30/GB I've heard quoted for the Fusion IO cards.
Uh, the X25-e is about $700 and isn't nearly as fast. Of course as I found out today it's faster than the freaking $500 HP P400 raid controller in my server, plug the x25-e into the builtin SATA port on my HP desktop and I get ~40K IOPS and 170MB/s @4K 100% random writes, in the P400 I get ~16k IOPS and 65MB/s same workload.
WTF, we have had PoE for forever, you can supply up to 15.6W with current specs and up to ~22W with the next generation spec. Almost every single port on my Cisco 4500 switches in our IDF's is already supporting a device drawing either 9 or 15.6W, they aren't damaged in the least.
I was referencing this line:
BTW, you can cut the power to your computer if you use hibernate instead of standby.
Which definitely wasn't talking about AT systems =)
They should have an XP tech version that allows you to increase TCP connections, and import policies without Active Directory, and allow more that 10 SMB connections, and be able to update other XP boxen with its own installed Windows patches.
They do, it's called Windows Server 2003 with WSUS installed =)
I apologize, I misread your statement. You are correct that Autoplay does not need autorun.inf, what this CERT advisory is dealing with is a number of codepaths that the MS advisory does not fully account for. If you follow the MS advice AND apply that reg key you are covered.
I'm sorry but the MS solution, even if fully effective is MUCH more complicated than a 3 line reg file which permanently disables autorun unless it somehow gets re-associated with a correct event handler.