It works. It's iSCSI + CIFS / Windows share. It has clustering and block replication. It's open source and support is available. Support is per server - unlimited sockets and storage - so you could really work them with a few hundred PB on a pair of 8 socket/32 core servers. I don't work for them, but they rock!
They're geeks. If you bribe them properly they might come up with a proprietary block level dedupe solution for you.
You've got low latency and high bandwidth. Make your storage iSCSI OpenFiler configured in cluster mode with block replication. Do use a pair of the BackBlaze boxes somebody else mentioned. Configure with RAID 6. Get enterprise support here. You're in and done at $16K capital cost, $2k labor, and annual support (24/7 4 hour response) at $6200/yr for 67TB of raw storage (~48TB net) plus whatever the network, rackspace and power costs, and it scales in volume storage at linear cost when your needs do and the more volume you have, the better performance gets. As a bonus it fits in two 4U slots.
If you want to skimp you don't have to fully populate the boxes until you need the room and can save $8K in capital costs up front. Every couple of months you have to hot-swap out some cheapo consumer grade drives so buy a few spares and configure them as hot spares and a few more for cold spares. If you have some extra Franklins, splurge on the 10G Ethernet connection from the BackBlaze box to the local network - the remote can stay on Gig-E because it's only used for writes or HA. With a little mental gymnastics and PSU field modifications you can use one BackBlaze master to control up to three BackBlaze slaves with passthrough connections only - no internal server needed. Just get the cards with some external eSATA or external SAS ports, depending on your preference. You might need to upgrade the motherboard spec on the master BackBlaze box, but it's worth the extra money. Since Openfiler support is unlimited CPU you may as well get the dual quad core Nehalem motherboard with 72GB RAM and 8 PCIe slots, or whatever's in the sweet spot this week. I do like the X5550, but if you can get a quad core for under $100 it's hard to pass up, especially combined with one of these cheap motherboards that use up to 32GB of cheap DDR2 RAM. Be careful with your PCIe slot counts when choosing motherboards.
Configure whatever machine you're using to do a backup periodically from one i-SCSI LUN on the local machine to another LUN. This gives you protection against 90% of backup needs (oops! I accidentally all all my presentations!) and will be transparently replicated to the HA site at block level without user intervention. Somewhere in here you should educate users that backup systems are not an alternative method of version control.
You could probably upgrade this with a few TB of PCIe attachedSSDcache (pdf) for the million plus IOPS, guaranteed multiple 10Gbps network port saturation for an additional $40k, if you knew how, or why, or needed to.
Or you can go cheap with Linux and BSD and some scripts. You won't save any money and you won't have support. Buy the support. It's worth the money. Disclosure: I don't work for any of these folks. For the company I work for I can quote you a FC SAN. Trust me, you don't want to know what that costs for 67TB with block replication to a DR site and 24/7 4 hour support, let alone the scalable solution I've proposed here. Just assume it's "a lot".
On the other hand, EDS is/was Sun's biggest customer and HP overall is a pretty huge Oracle software customer, too.
I think there are some "has been"s missing here. I think Larry Ellison has finally overestimated the length of his, er, grasp. There are balance of power issues in bridging hardware and software markets that Apple seems to get away with, but others don't. How Apple is doing the last five years relative to the WinTel alliance should tell you where this ends up (up 800% vs market performance +-5%).
If I were Mark Hurd I'd be looking to acquire a database company. MySQL is out, and that means recruiting the PostgreSQL developers into a well funded extrapreneurial endeavor. HP loves this sort of game, and they do it well. They got caught goofy footed so they better play this right if they want to come out on top.
There's going to be a lot of shakeup over this one. IBM and Dell must be pondering the enduring fidelity of Oracle in a world where they make their own servers.
Whether it's a nearby supernova bathing the planet in radiation for years, or a rogue comet or asteroid impact - whether it's man's inhumanity to Mother Earth or a return of the periodic glaciation which has been Earth's habit these last billion years, or something else, the Earth will become uninhabitable by humans eventually.
I've always wondered why some people seem to think it inevitable that the entire human race will forego living on planets.
At the time I've described above if there aren't human colonies off this rock it's game over for the human race. Life will go on, but it won't be us. All humans may not forego living on planets, but some by necessity must. Or we won't, and there'll be nobody left to call me a liar.
By then we'll be living in space and the presence or absence of "habitable worlds" will be moot. We will once again be going beyond the next horizon because "it's there".
Well you should try Avira Professional then. They've got a Linux version and the FIRST 30 days are FREE. With on-access virus scanning you should have the most secure Linux ever.
Don't forget to get LGA as well. It will give you all the benefits of WGA, on Linux - with the added bonus that it's FOSS!
If you can confirm that there was malware on the system there is no cure except to start with a clean image - preferably one you stored with an imaging tool like the free Clonezilla prior to accessing any network at all or any untrusted media. Putting a clean image on can take 5-30 minutes, and is certain to remove all traces of infestation. It's actually quicker than scanning. Once you've got a confirmed hit your only business using a compromised machine is an inspection of the features that got the user into trouble so you can turn those off after you image, and capture for them a more suitable image.
There's a tired old nag about no software being secure but really one thing is for certain: once an app has been running that's known to be infested it got there because the maker knew something the user didn't. Among the other things the user doesn't know are how many other applications the malware infested, how many running services were leveraged with local privilege escalation, how many rootkits of various sorts were installed. Most modern malware immediately upon installation scans the local system and sniffs the network. They look up components and download a cocktail of toxic code that's both tailored to the specific machine and randomly generated so as to be unique. There's a management system that auto-permutes millions of vile code variants every day, and uses a genetic algorithm to determine which of the little beasties is the most efficient. This is not your dad's malware ecosystem.
Pretending to remove malware is nothing short of malpractice. All you're doing is helping the bad guys by pointing out which modules survive a cursory attempt at cleaning.
An algae farm could be located almost anywhere. It would not require converting cropland from food production to energy production. It could use sea water and could consume pollutants from sewage and power plants.
Has anybody suggested a nice oceanfront inland area with lots of rail and marine transport? One with storage and refinery capabilities? One that's already below sea level? Because I think there's a likely spot in Louisiana.
In recognition for his outstanding achievements in bridging the gap between FOSS and Microsoft, let me suggest Miguel de Icaza. I doubt there's another human who's done more to embrace Microsoft patented technologies and extend them into popular Linux distributions. With his advocacy on OOXML, his dedicated efforts on Mono and Moonlight he's proven himself a capable mimic who can transform Free and Open Source Software from the type of innovative cauldron that gave us our current rich selection into a uniform platform that consistently replicates Microsoft, only perpetually two years behind.
They should get him - if only they have what it takes to lure him away from Novell.
as they are anything but insignificant, by definition.
If you're going to use definitions to win arguments, please update the Wikipedia page to include that property. Oddly enough this results in circular logic because the definition of definition includes the system of scientific classification of life.
I'd just like to see more positive reinforcement, lest their devs lose any inclination to release code voluntarily in the future.
This code supports Linux guests in Hyper-V. In other words, it takes the legendary speed, security and stability of Windows and fuses it to the famous app compatibility and user friendliness of Linux.
It's fair to say the world is better off without it. I'd just as soon people didn't encourage such foolishness.
It's deliberate cognitive dissonance. It's their way of attacking the value of words like "free", "open", "facts", "ROI". They create something that means the exact opposite and then attach the word that bothers them to it, and over time the two symbols negate each other. I believe it's called "doublespeak", from a fictional work by George Orwell in which it had a role in the story.
Google's plan to digitize and bring online all books is of immense value to society. All of the objections offer only to prevent this great service with no alternative. Therefore they are bad.
As noted in the summary, Microsoft had their own effort and abandoned it. Too bad for them. They don't now get to prevent somebody else from doing it. If they want to pick the effort back up they're welcome to provide a competing service - Google's deal is not exclusive.
Microsoft attempting to prevent Google from providing this great work is evil. In other words: if you won't lead get out of the way.
Ok, to be fair it really is possible to add programs with the add/remove programs feature of Windows. It's also horrifically expensive and complex, but it is, in a limited sense, possible.
The story is far too long for a slashdot post. It's a history of thirty years. Even the higher education aspects would take a whole book to tell. The tragedy of our current youth is that if the offense and the slap don't happen in the same second, that's implied consent.
If you really want to understand, start at "Halloween documents". Proceed from there. Read and understand them all before you come back and school me.
Ransom Love's shameful hubris is perhaps best lost to the mists of time, but in the long run it will be the pivot upon which all this swings. The fault is not his yet but I'm going to pin it on him, and that's an achievement in itself. Maybe you've gained something after all: you were here when it happened, working with the folk who put it together. Try to remember that even the greatest heroes thought they were just trying to get home.
There are always alternatives, it's just that some don't "feel" like MS stuff enough, so they fall by the wayside.
I'm not a patent lawyer but I should think an "Add/remove" programs feature that actually adds programs is sufficiently innovative in the Windows world to merit patent protection.
One thing I have learned is that those most versed in dialectic discourse have abandoned the sciences and so argue without understanding. They argue well, but understand not what they've won or lost.
Slashdot Mirror
It works. It's iSCSI + CIFS / Windows share. It has clustering and block replication. It's open source and support is available. Support is per server - unlimited sockets and storage - so you could really work them with a few hundred PB on a pair of 8 socket/32 core servers. I don't work for them, but they rock!
They're geeks. If you bribe them properly they might come up with a proprietary block level dedupe solution for you.
The correct answers change every week.
You've got low latency and high bandwidth. Make your storage iSCSI OpenFiler configured in cluster mode with block replication. Do use a pair of the BackBlaze boxes somebody else mentioned. Configure with RAID 6. Get enterprise support here. You're in and done at $16K capital cost, $2k labor, and annual support (24/7 4 hour response) at $6200/yr for 67TB of raw storage (~48TB net) plus whatever the network, rackspace and power costs, and it scales in volume storage at linear cost when your needs do and the more volume you have, the better performance gets. As a bonus it fits in two 4U slots.
If you want to skimp you don't have to fully populate the boxes until you need the room and can save $8K in capital costs up front. Every couple of months you have to hot-swap out some cheapo consumer grade drives so buy a few spares and configure them as hot spares and a few more for cold spares. If you have some extra Franklins, splurge on the 10G Ethernet connection from the BackBlaze box to the local network - the remote can stay on Gig-E because it's only used for writes or HA. With a little mental gymnastics and PSU field modifications you can use one BackBlaze master to control up to three BackBlaze slaves with passthrough connections only - no internal server needed. Just get the cards with some external eSATA or external SAS ports, depending on your preference. You might need to upgrade the motherboard spec on the master BackBlaze box, but it's worth the extra money. Since Openfiler support is unlimited CPU you may as well get the dual quad core Nehalem motherboard with 72GB RAM and 8 PCIe slots, or whatever's in the sweet spot this week. I do like the X5550, but if you can get a quad core for under $100 it's hard to pass up, especially combined with one of these cheap motherboards that use up to 32GB of cheap DDR2 RAM. Be careful with your PCIe slot counts when choosing motherboards.
Configure whatever machine you're using to do a backup periodically from one i-SCSI LUN on the local machine to another LUN. This gives you protection against 90% of backup needs (oops! I accidentally all all my presentations!) and will be transparently replicated to the HA site at block level without user intervention. Somewhere in here you should educate users that backup systems are not an alternative method of version control.
You could probably upgrade this with a few TB of PCIe attached SSD cache (pdf) for the million plus IOPS, guaranteed multiple 10Gbps network port saturation for an additional $40k, if you knew how, or why, or needed to.
Or you can go cheap with Linux and BSD and some scripts. You won't save any money and you won't have support. Buy the support. It's worth the money. Disclosure: I don't work for any of these folks. For the company I work for I can quote you a FC SAN. Trust me, you don't want to know what that costs for 67TB with block replication to a DR site and 24/7 4 hour support, let alone the scalable solution I've proposed here. Just assume it's "a lot".
On the other hand, EDS is/was Sun's biggest customer and HP overall is a pretty huge Oracle software customer, too.
I think there are some "has been"s missing here. I think Larry Ellison has finally overestimated the length of his, er, grasp. There are balance of power issues in bridging hardware and software markets that Apple seems to get away with, but others don't. How Apple is doing the last five years relative to the WinTel alliance should tell you where this ends up (up 800% vs market performance +-5%).
If I were Mark Hurd I'd be looking to acquire a database company. MySQL is out, and that means recruiting the PostgreSQL developers into a well funded extrapreneurial endeavor. HP loves this sort of game, and they do it well. They got caught goofy footed so they better play this right if they want to come out on top.
There's going to be a lot of shakeup over this one. IBM and Dell must be pondering the enduring fidelity of Oracle in a world where they make their own servers.
And that's a two-way street.
That's three reasons why we should do it. Got any more?
Whether it's a nearby supernova bathing the planet in radiation for years, or a rogue comet or asteroid impact - whether it's man's inhumanity to Mother Earth or a return of the periodic glaciation which has been Earth's habit these last billion years, or something else, the Earth will become uninhabitable by humans eventually.
I've always wondered why some people seem to think it inevitable that the entire human race will forego living on planets.
At the time I've described above if there aren't human colonies off this rock it's game over for the human race. Life will go on, but it won't be us. All humans may not forego living on planets, but some by necessity must. Or we won't, and there'll be nobody left to call me a liar.
By then we'll be living in space and the presence or absence of "habitable worlds" will be moot. We will once again be going beyond the next horizon because "it's there".
Chart(jpg) shows 92% 'other'.
Unless, of course, he's got one of these.
Well you should try Avira Professional then. They've got a Linux version and the FIRST 30 days are FREE. With on-access virus scanning you should have the most secure Linux ever.
Don't forget to get LGA as well. It will give you all the benefits of WGA, on Linux - with the added bonus that it's FOSS!
If you can confirm that there was malware on the system there is no cure except to start with a clean image - preferably one you stored with an imaging tool like the free Clonezilla prior to accessing any network at all or any untrusted media. Putting a clean image on can take 5-30 minutes, and is certain to remove all traces of infestation. It's actually quicker than scanning. Once you've got a confirmed hit your only business using a compromised machine is an inspection of the features that got the user into trouble so you can turn those off after you image, and capture for them a more suitable image.
There's a tired old nag about no software being secure but really one thing is for certain: once an app has been running that's known to be infested it got there because the maker knew something the user didn't. Among the other things the user doesn't know are how many other applications the malware infested, how many running services were leveraged with local privilege escalation, how many rootkits of various sorts were installed. Most modern malware immediately upon installation scans the local system and sniffs the network. They look up components and download a cocktail of toxic code that's both tailored to the specific machine and randomly generated so as to be unique. There's a management system that auto-permutes millions of vile code variants every day, and uses a genetic algorithm to determine which of the little beasties is the most efficient. This is not your dad's malware ecosystem.
Pretending to remove malware is nothing short of malpractice. All you're doing is helping the bad guys by pointing out which modules survive a cursory attempt at cleaning.
No, Oct 31 is the day we celebrate the Sacred Documents.
Just waiting for the flamefest here of Linux vs Windows botnets.
OK, I'll start. Linux webservers are so lame they don't even include the facility for users to disable them remotely in case of malware distribution.
An algae farm could be located almost anywhere. It would not require converting cropland from food production to energy production. It could use sea water and could consume pollutants from sewage and power plants.
Has anybody suggested a nice oceanfront inland area with lots of rail and marine transport? One with storage and refinery capabilities? One that's already below sea level? Because I think there's a likely spot in Louisiana.
In recognition for his outstanding achievements in bridging the gap between FOSS and Microsoft, let me suggest Miguel de Icaza. I doubt there's another human who's done more to embrace Microsoft patented technologies and extend them into popular Linux distributions. With his advocacy on OOXML, his dedicated efforts on Mono and Moonlight he's proven himself a capable mimic who can transform Free and Open Source Software from the type of innovative cauldron that gave us our current rich selection into a uniform platform that consistently replicates Microsoft, only perpetually two years behind.
They should get him - if only they have what it takes to lure him away from Novell.
as they are anything but insignificant, by definition.
If you're going to use definitions to win arguments, please update the Wikipedia page to include that property. Oddly enough this results in circular logic because the definition of definition includes the system of scientific classification of life.
Robots can't take ownership. That requires humans.
I'd just like to see more positive reinforcement, lest their devs lose any inclination to release code voluntarily in the future.
This code supports Linux guests in Hyper-V. In other words, it takes the legendary speed, security and stability of Windows and fuses it to the famous app compatibility and user friendliness of Linux.
It's fair to say the world is better off without it. I'd just as soon people didn't encourage such foolishness.
It's deliberate cognitive dissonance. It's their way of attacking the value of words like "free", "open", "facts", "ROI". They create something that means the exact opposite and then attach the word that bothers them to it, and over time the two symbols negate each other. I believe it's called "doublespeak", from a fictional work by George Orwell in which it had a role in the story.
Google's plan to digitize and bring online all books is of immense value to society. All of the objections offer only to prevent this great service with no alternative. Therefore they are bad.
As noted in the summary, Microsoft had their own effort and abandoned it. Too bad for them. They don't now get to prevent somebody else from doing it. If they want to pick the effort back up they're welcome to provide a competing service - Google's deal is not exclusive.
Microsoft attempting to prevent Google from providing this great work is evil. In other words: if you won't lead get out of the way.
Ok, to be fair it really is possible to add programs with the add/remove programs feature of Windows. It's also horrifically expensive and complex, but it is, in a limited sense, possible.
The story is far too long for a slashdot post. It's a history of thirty years. Even the higher education aspects would take a whole book to tell. The tragedy of our current youth is that if the offense and the slap don't happen in the same second, that's implied consent.
If you really want to understand, start at "Halloween documents". Proceed from there. Read and understand them all before you come back and school me.
Ransom Love's shameful hubris is perhaps best lost to the mists of time, but in the long run it will be the pivot upon which all this swings. The fault is not his yet but I'm going to pin it on him, and that's an achievement in itself. Maybe you've gained something after all: you were here when it happened, working with the folk who put it together. Try to remember that even the greatest heroes thought they were just trying to get home.
Mr. Love, would you care to rebut?
There are always alternatives, it's just that some don't "feel" like MS stuff enough, so they fall by the wayside.
I'm not a patent lawyer but I should think an "Add/remove" programs feature that actually adds programs is sufficiently innovative in the Windows world to merit patent protection.
One thing I have learned is that those most versed in dialectic discourse have abandoned the sciences and so argue without understanding. They argue well, but understand not what they've won or lost.