Nothing against chasing this dream however I'd like a few billionaires to invest in the storage of energy that we can currently harvest - solar, wind - types of energy that we have available in abundance right now, but where the difficulty is storage.
People eventually recognised that the apps just weren't funny, sent anyone installing them to Coventry and then got on with their lives without annoyance - oh, and they learned how to lock their computer, pranks are much more of a motivation to do that than the threat of security issues...
"Snapshots/CDP" "It is common now especially with SANs to use Snapshots and CDP" - Is it!? Snapshots yes, CDP no way, how many use that other than banks, and banks willbe making damn sure they have good backup processes in place. "but any block level changes would mean an increase in the replication traffic" - Block level changes are occuring all the time, snapshots won't make a difference and the snapshot size only increases if there is more changed data since the last snapshot. "we still need to defragment as fragmented volumes take considerable time to backup" - this does not apply to all SAN technology, certainly not Netapp.
If the section on Snapshots/CDP is anything to go by then the not only is the article rubbish, but the original research behind it probably suspect.
The best solution to your problem probably would be using Microsoft's AD RMS.
Can this solution be used without an Active Directory environment?
There are plenty of organisations out there using other authentication, authorisation and trustee management mechanisms, just wondering what their options might be.
Scousers (those from the area of Liverpool) have been calling satellite dishes 'Woks' since the 1980s - "'as 'e gorra wok on the wall?" - I'm surprised it hasn't been tried this way round before before!
And the safety record under this privatised system has gone through the floor. Something to do with an effort to cut costs to improve the profit margin?
You want to minimise downtime therefore you need -
Resilience Redundancy Compatibility
If a PSU fails do you have to down the server, no, because you have a server with hot plug redundant PSUs, slide the dead one out and slide a new one in.
If a disk fails do you have to down the server, no, you pull out the hot plug SCSI drive and slide in a new one and let the array rebuild.
If an on board fan fails do you have to down the server, no, you slide the server out of the rack and pop off the top or if floorstanding you remove the side, unplug the failed fan and plug in a new one.
If an array controller fails what do you replace it with, will it detect your disk array? Will it blow away your configuration? My experience is with HP/Compaq, their array controllers are backward compatible, plug in a fresh one, connect the arrays and your original array is back up. With Dell they have different manufacturers of the chip sets on the array controllers so a little more thought is required but the same should apply. With a home brew server you really are going to have to put a lot of effort in to make sure you get the right controller so you can see your data, do you really need that much extra work when under pressure? Is your hourly rate that low that you can't afford a brand name server?
SCSI versus SATA
SCSI disks have a duty cycle of at least 90%, the latest and greatest SATA disks have a duty cycle of 60%, that means that the typical amount of usage per 24 hour period will not exceed those %ages and those disks are guaranteed and sold on that basis, if the disks are used above those figures the lifespan of the disk will be diminished. SATA may be approaching SCSI in many ways but it isn't there yet so for serious server use unless you have multiple redundancy in your raid arrays then it is less than ideal.
The cost of a new server is so low now that in the professional environment it really isn't worth cobbling together some collection of parts. If you are running a test server in your bedroom then maybe.
And lastly, pay for maintenance, let someone else deal with the headache of changing a failed mainboard, the cost of maintenace on these modern boxes is so low you would be foolish not to.
Where is it? I see lots of software that states it works with a hyperthreading capable operating system, in the Win XP world for instance, but I haven't seen any examples of software that clearly states that it is hyperthreading capable.
Is this a case of the emperors new clothes or is my limited exposure to XP software making me look foolish?
I did a google search and haven't found any software that clearly states it is hyperthreading capable other than XP itself. Anyone have a list?
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing against chasing this dream however I'd like a few billionaires to invest in the storage of energy that we can currently harvest - solar, wind - types of energy that we have available in abundance right now, but where the difficulty is storage.
People eventually recognised that the apps just weren't funny, sent anyone installing them to Coventry and then got on with their lives without annoyance - oh, and they learned how to lock their computer, pranks are much more of a motivation to do that than the threat of security issues...
pretty sure I played this game. no wait. dug up games on a landfill site, that was it, different type of game.
Pretty sure I'll still be working at the point of vapourisation given the never ending increases in retirement age and lifespan.
"Snapshots/CDP"
"It is common now especially with SANs to use Snapshots and CDP" - Is it!? Snapshots yes, CDP no way, how many use that other than banks, and banks willbe making damn sure they have good backup processes in place.
"but any block level changes would mean an increase in the replication traffic" - Block level changes are occuring all the time, snapshots won't make a difference and the snapshot size only increases if there is more changed data since the last snapshot.
"we still need to defragment as fragmented volumes take considerable time to backup" - this does not apply to all SAN technology, certainly not Netapp.
If the section on Snapshots/CDP is anything to go by then the not only is the article rubbish, but the original research behind it probably suspect.
The best solution to your problem probably would be using Microsoft's AD RMS.
Can this solution be used without an Active Directory environment?
There are plenty of organisations out there using other authentication, authorisation and trustee management mechanisms, just wondering what their options might be.
Great, no new information, just an advert for a drive recovery company.
I'm going to have to train Adblock to parse Slashdot for this sort of rubbish now!
Pretty much the opposite of the point of the internetwork infrastructure!
-It's the only way to stop my chair rusting.
Downtime?! You get downtime???
I meant, "People Greedy-Business" - tsk! Time for a lie down...
It might confuse search rankings and introduce a new spin on the phrase, thereby making the original phrase tainted?
AndyH
Scousers (those from the area of Liverpool) have been calling satellite dishes 'Woks' since the 1980s - "'as 'e gorra wok on the wall?" - I'm surprised it hasn't been tried this way round before before!
I got it. But then again I am probably too old. C'est la vie...
And the safety record under this privatised system has gone through the floor. Something to do with an effort to cut costs to improve the profit margin?
- surely?
You want to minimise downtime therefore you need -
Resilience
Redundancy
Compatibility
If a PSU fails do you have to down the server, no, because you have a server with hot plug redundant PSUs, slide the dead one out and slide a new one in.
If a disk fails do you have to down the server, no, you pull out the hot plug SCSI drive and slide in a new one and let the array rebuild.
If an on board fan fails do you have to down the server, no, you slide the server out of the rack and pop off the top or if floorstanding you remove the side, unplug the failed fan and plug in a new one.
If an array controller fails what do you replace it with, will it detect your disk array? Will it blow away your configuration? My experience is with HP/Compaq, their array controllers are backward compatible, plug in a fresh one, connect the arrays and your original array is back up. With Dell they have different manufacturers of the chip sets on the array controllers so a little more thought is required but the same should apply. With a home brew server you really are going to have to put a lot of effort in to make sure you get the right controller so you can see your data, do you really need that much extra work when under pressure? Is your hourly rate that low that you can't afford a brand name server?
SCSI versus SATA
SCSI disks have a duty cycle of at least 90%, the latest and greatest SATA disks have a duty cycle of 60%, that means that the typical amount of usage per 24 hour period will not exceed those %ages and those disks are guaranteed and sold on that basis, if the disks are used above those figures the lifespan of the disk will be diminished. SATA may be approaching SCSI in many ways but it isn't there yet so for serious server use unless you have multiple redundancy in your raid arrays then it is less than ideal.
The cost of a new server is so low now that in the professional environment it really isn't worth cobbling together some collection of parts. If you are running a test server in your bedroom then maybe.
And lastly, pay for maintenance, let someone else deal with the headache of changing a failed mainboard, the cost of maintenace on these modern boxes is so low you would be foolish not to.
Where is it? I see lots of software that states it works with a hyperthreading capable operating system, in the Win XP world for instance, but I haven't seen any examples of software that clearly states that it is hyperthreading capable.
Is this a case of the emperors new clothes or is my limited exposure to XP software making me look foolish?
I did a google search and haven't found any software that clearly states it is hyperthreading capable other than XP itself. Anyone have a list?
Andy
It is in fact, knackered.
This was tested against a live directory with the same number of users and objects each time?
How was your test environment organised?
Oh no, you were being ironic, I must pay more attention.
The lack of women players mentioned here is a bit off, could be bad reporting of the research or just plain old bad research.
I suspect that the writer of the article being a man decided that the only relevant and interesting part for him was the testosterone related stuff.
Maybe he beats everyone else in the office at chess regularly......
surely that presumes the existence of Bill?