9.04 is not early for Ubuntu, and Arch has much problems with needing to keep up on every hairbrained thing the Arch developers are doing instead of it just working. Update and Pacman is using GPG all of a sudden, locking you out of everything? To the forums with you. Readline updates, but everything you're using from the AUR is still linked against the old version (that they just removed)? To the forums with you. Awesome3 changed its configuration again? Forums. Etc. If you want to work instead of tinker, Arch is about as awesome a choice as Gentoo.
A trivial Perl script to wrap that if you want it programmatically is 98 characters, with proper spacing and no golfing at all.
Python:
python -c "import os,re;[open('outfile.txt','a').write(re.sub(r'(.{3})A', r'\1B', line)) for line in open('infile.txt','rb')]"
Yes, that's golfed a tad to make it convenient as a oneliner, but the "re.sub" bit is much, much shorter than your ridiculous map+join combination. Just because you don't know regular expressions doesn't mean they're not more efficient.
That's for the (older) UL80VT rather than the UL80JT. The VT uses Core2 ULV, a GeForce 210, the switchable graphics have a noticeable delay (like Thinkpad T400s), etc. This is presumably a newer version.
Yeah, what you say is probably accurate for a snip of time for intel PC programmers.
... You might summarize by saying every new thing for that platform was initially a cost, then imitated at a loss by Microsoft, then included in the OS distribution or dependencies.
Uh, what? Microsoft wasn't a concern at the time. Ultrix, Tru64, AIX, Solaris, VMS, IRIX, MVS, Nonstop, and all the other relevant operating systems at the time used that licensing model. HPUX still does -- they ship a non-ANSI C compiler and a crippled linker. You can't compile anything without paying for a compiler or wedging GCC on there. MIPSPro was never free. suncc wasn't free, etc.
GNU was founded before the era of Microsoft dominance. I don't really like GNU (CDDL, Apache, or BSD license if you please), but OP has valid points.
The thing is, at least in every part of the country I've lived in, it's cheaper by $20/month or so to get basic, no-frills cable plus cable internet than cable internet by itself.
Given the form factor, I'd say, yes, for the desktop (in the same way as an E3k, deskside Onyx, AlphaServer 2100, et al). The difference between distributed and parallel is essentially zero other than swapping client/server to parent/child threads. A system like this would be ideal for localized rendering jobs, virtualization, and a number of other tasks that may be undertaken. More than that, it's modular. You don't need to get ridiculous amounts of licenses for Vmotion, Windows, ESX, or whatever it may be, and it can be expanded as the business gets the money.
Frankly, this is not aimed at your budget or what you can afford. I'd question your ability to compete on price/performance for all but the most trivial tasks also (a fully loaded Octane III is damn close to list price on the components).
If 1000TX had anywhere near the latency of Infiniband, maybe. There's no doubt that clustering has its point, but you cannot possibly believe that individual nodes communicating across 1000TX (or 1000FX, for that matter) are going to compete with a chassis like this in this segment. No, I don't consider TFTP/NFS/PXE booting to be solutions in this manner, since nodes in a cluster are not the same thing as a single image, and they have no access to peripherals which may be in the chassis (if one goes with the PCIe expansions).
The form factor matters not because of aesthetics, but because fast interconnects and redundant components matter for some applications. It is not a competitor to desktops.
Let me know when you assemble what is essentially a blade chassis (it's really more comparable to the Onyx/Origin, Superdome, or Sun's E$numK systems given that you have the option of using PCIe nodes instead) with Infiniband interconnects in a deskside form factor, plus redundant hot-swappable components and the ability to run the entire thing as a single OS image yourself.
I don't pretend to understand Intel's modeling scheme here. A small bump (55xx), with some of them having HyperThreading, some not, some have QPI, some not, etc. It's not exactly intuitive, and I wouldn't have known to look there either if we weren't using some of them.
I'm going to say you didn't look hard enough. Published SPEC results have a Sun Fire x4270/x2270 walking all over the T5240/T5120 for 1/3rd of the cost or less (with 6GB of RAM).
They cannot, of course, run nearly as many threads in hardware, but for brute-forcing compression, it's sort of a moot point.
They're moving from 1.6Ghz single core Itaniums to dual quad core Xeon blades. I suspect they're talking about cores to emphasize the density gain, and because people like huge numbers.
You can call me whatever you want. Knowing the whole story rather than just blaming the language helps. FYI, they'd have had the same problem no matter what language they used.
This will be the last reply to your inane trolling and idiocy.
Why can't they make a language, or extend a language like Ruby, such that one can program it as a scripting language, but then add verbosity optionally
They did. It's called PHP. Notice how much better it scales in that benchmark.
EEEH! Try again. Development speed is lost as complexity increases. Development speed is again attained through a framework (as all languages can also attain). Ruby has no inherent speed advantages for development. This is an amazing con by RAILS people and anyone can develop well and fast who understands and knows a framework well. I myself use the PHPulse framework and can crank out new CRUD functionality in about 30 minutes to an hour.
You are clearly a PHP dev.
I mentioned JRuby once. Interpreted "layers" are not written directly on top of the JVM or CLR (see: IronPython, IronRuby, Jython, JRuby, Scala, Clojure, etc). By your definition, Scala is also a "layer." The benchmarks for JRuby are bad because there were ZERO flags passed to it (-Xint, -server, -client, ANYTHING), and JVM startup time is brutal. You'll notice the Java is heavily optimized. FYI -- YARV is faster than PHP. As an aside, Javascript is also dog slow, but I'd wager you use that.
I'm not the one coming off as an idiot here, CAPSLOCK ARE CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL.
You are not listening. I do not use Ruby. I use Perl and Python, given that I'm a systems administrator.
Your uninformed bullshit was an explicit reference to Twitter, as it's apparent that you don't know anything about there internals or why performance was crap. Pointing out facts to you is not a tantrum.
Go back to your "real" language and with its ripped-off Perl mysql_escape_string vs. mysql_real_escape string. Do try learning something new every now and then, though. Different paradigms make you a better developer.
You also saw Scala, among other things. If you saw "ruby ruby ruby ruby" it's because you spouted uninformed bullshit, and though I'm not a Rubyist, you could at least get it right.
If you actually bothered to read the rest of the reply, you'd see why Ruby was not the problem, though I admit that performance is not one of Ruby's strong points.
Not that you're going to change your mind, no matter what sites are running Ruby (I'll add GitHub and Penny Arcade to that list).
Don't make me a strawman. I am not part of the Ruby community, but I'm not a rabid fucking PHP fanboy either (you).
I can, though, have my cake and eat it, too. The simple fact is that Twitter suffered from NIH and implemented a half-assed homegrown queue and state machine that they didn't significantly update for years. They did not even try JRuby or rewriting -- an employee rewrote in in Scala for the hell of it and it performed better. Notably, large parts of Twitter are still using Rails, just not that one.
You're looking for an excuse to hate Ruby, and I don't really know why. It's a tool. It may have been the right tool, it may have been the wrong tool, but Twitter didn't even try. Scribd? Hulu? Yellowpages? They don't scale? Sure, not as many sites run Rails as PHP, but don't blame the language for shoddy craftsmanship (Twitter's event stack).
It's not going to die as quickly as you think it will, and even if it does, it's virtually guaranteed to be something like ASP MVC or Django which takes its place.
See this and leave off your trolling. Ruby has its problems, and performance is one of them, but scaling is not so long as you don't re-invent shitty event systems yourself (like Twitter did).
Hellhole is relative. By your definition, probably. Yes, they had secret police and a fairly oppressive government. They also had sanitation facilities, power, and other infrastructure which we bombed out upon invasion. They had competent public servants with decades of experience who we promptly declared criminals when we outlawed The B'aath party. Employment rates were higher before the invasion. While this may turn out for them in the end, it's far from decided, and as it stands, they're worse off by every measurable economic metric. GDP is rather an unfair comparison unless you compare it to pre-sanction levels, and using numbers from 2003 (brutal sanctions, Iraq couldn't sell oil, just starting to recover from the global recession in 2001-ish) is utterly disingenuous, not that you probably care.
Please explain how Hannibal handled a nonexistent entity (the Roman Empire). It was the Roman Republic. He spent 15 years in Italy, and was unable to come to a decisive finish due to Carthaginian authorities diverting resources to Iberia and Roman control of the sea (preventing Hannibal from getting siege equipment that would let him take major cities), combined with trouble at home (Numidia specifically). Initial success (including what is possibly the most crushing defeat in military history for the Romans), left to languish with limited manpower, dwindling public support in Italy, and multiple fronts from the home government. The Romans (Fabius Maximus) took to a strategy of harassment and delay without any open engagements. Sound familiar? It's an oft-repeated story, yet somehow people convince themselves that "quick, decisive" wars will automatically "shock and awe" the native populace like life is a video game.
As an aside, the Punic wars had fuck-all to do with "tyranny and oppression." They were purely power struggles, with neither side being particularly virtuous. Unless I'm mistaken, "tyranny and oppression" can also be dealt with through other means (British India being a notable example, though there are others historically). Most of the time, dealing with "tyranny and oppression" through force leads to another radical in power when the "force" isn't pressing anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
9.04 is not early for Ubuntu, and Arch has much problems with needing to keep up on every hairbrained thing the Arch developers are doing instead of it just working. Update and Pacman is using GPG all of a sudden, locking you out of everything? To the forums with you. Readline updates, but everything you're using from the AUR is still linked against the old version (that they just removed)? To the forums with you. Awesome3 changed its configuration again? Forums. Etc. If you want to work instead of tinker, Arch is about as awesome a choice as Gentoo.
I like how you completely ignored Solaris yet still presented the comment as if it was a valid counterargument.
Is this a terrible, terrible joke? That's 186 characters. Comparatively:
sed -r -ie "s/(.{3})A/\1B/g" somefile
Or:
perl -pi.orig -e 's/(.{3})A/$1B/g' somefile
A trivial Perl script to wrap that if you want it programmatically is 98 characters, with proper spacing and no golfing at all.
Python:
python -c "import os,re;[open('outfile.txt','a').write(re.sub(r'(.{3})A', r'\1B', line)) for line in open('infile.txt','rb')]"
Yes, that's golfed a tad to make it convenient as a oneliner, but the "re.sub" bit is much, much shorter than your ridiculous map+join combination. Just because you don't know regular expressions doesn't mean they're not more efficient.
That's for the (older) UL80VT rather than the UL80JT. The VT uses Core2 ULV, a GeForce 210, the switchable graphics have a noticeable delay (like Thinkpad T400s), etc. This is presumably a newer version.
Yeah, what you say is probably accurate for a snip of time for intel PC programmers.
... You might summarize by saying every new thing for that platform was initially a cost, then imitated at a loss by Microsoft, then included in the OS distribution or dependencies.
Uh, what? Microsoft wasn't a concern at the time. Ultrix, Tru64, AIX, Solaris, VMS, IRIX, MVS, Nonstop, and all the other relevant operating systems at the time used that licensing model. HPUX still does -- they ship a non-ANSI C compiler and a crippled linker. You can't compile anything without paying for a compiler or wedging GCC on there. MIPSPro was never free. suncc wasn't free, etc.
GNU was founded before the era of Microsoft dominance. I don't really like GNU (CDDL, Apache, or BSD license if you please), but OP has valid points.
Our RedHat account manager indicates that RHEL6 will probably be based off F11 with some parts (likely the KVM bits) of F12.
The thing is, at least in every part of the country I've lived in, it's cheaper by $20/month or so to get basic, no-frills cable plus cable internet than cable internet by itself.
Given the form factor, I'd say, yes, for the desktop (in the same way as an E3k, deskside Onyx, AlphaServer 2100, et al). The difference between distributed and parallel is essentially zero other than swapping client/server to parent/child threads. A system like this would be ideal for localized rendering jobs, virtualization, and a number of other tasks that may be undertaken. More than that, it's modular. You don't need to get ridiculous amounts of licenses for Vmotion, Windows, ESX, or whatever it may be, and it can be expanded as the business gets the money.
Frankly, this is not aimed at your budget or what you can afford. I'd question your ability to compete on price/performance for all but the most trivial tasks also (a fully loaded Octane III is damn close to list price on the components).
If 1000TX had anywhere near the latency of Infiniband, maybe. There's no doubt that clustering has its point, but you cannot possibly believe that individual nodes communicating across 1000TX (or 1000FX, for that matter) are going to compete with a chassis like this in this segment. No, I don't consider TFTP/NFS/PXE booting to be solutions in this manner, since nodes in a cluster are not the same thing as a single image, and they have no access to peripherals which may be in the chassis (if one goes with the PCIe expansions).
The form factor matters not because of aesthetics, but because fast interconnects and redundant components matter for some applications. It is not a competitor to desktops.
Let me know when you assemble what is essentially a blade chassis (it's really more comparable to the Onyx/Origin, Superdome, or Sun's E$numK systems given that you have the option of using PCIe nodes instead) with Infiniband interconnects in a deskside form factor, plus redundant hot-swappable components and the ability to run the entire thing as a single OS image yourself.
If nobody's picked you up on this offer through other channels, I'm definitely interested.
I don't pretend to understand Intel's modeling scheme here. A small bump (55xx), with some of them having HyperThreading, some not, some have QPI, some not, etc. It's not exactly intuitive, and I wouldn't have known to look there either if we weren't using some of them.
I'm going to say you didn't look hard enough. Published SPEC results have a Sun Fire x4270/x2270 walking all over the T5240/T5120 for 1/3rd of the cost or less (with 6GB of RAM).
They cannot, of course, run nearly as many threads in hardware, but for brute-forcing compression, it's sort of a moot point.
SPARC VII, yes. The Nehalem Xeons are about on par with T2s at substantially lower cost.
The Altix line begs to differ. They're not using Onyxes.
They're moving from 1.6Ghz single core Itaniums to dual quad core Xeon blades. I suspect they're talking about cores to emphasize the density gain, and because people like huge numbers.
They're x6275 blade modules, meaning dual quad core Xeons with a max of 96GB of RAM.
I like the CMT SPARCs as much as anybody else, but they're frankly not competitive for this sort of workload (massive compression).
in the face of clear denial
That phrase doesn't mean what you think it means.
You can call me whatever you want. Knowing the whole story rather than just blaming the language helps. FYI, they'd have had the same problem no matter what language they used.
This will be the last reply to your inane trolling and idiocy.
Why can't they make a language, or extend a language like Ruby, such that one can program it as a scripting language, but then add verbosity optionally They did. It's called PHP. Notice how much better it scales in that benchmark.
EEEH! Try again. Development speed is lost as complexity increases. Development speed is again attained through a framework (as all languages can also attain). Ruby has no inherent speed advantages for development. This is an amazing con by RAILS people and anyone can develop well and fast who understands and knows a framework well. I myself use the PHPulse framework and can crank out new CRUD functionality in about 30 minutes to an hour.
You are clearly a PHP dev.
I mentioned JRuby once. Interpreted "layers" are not written directly on top of the JVM or CLR (see: IronPython, IronRuby, Jython, JRuby, Scala, Clojure, etc). By your definition, Scala is also a "layer." The benchmarks for JRuby are bad because there were ZERO flags passed to it (-Xint, -server, -client, ANYTHING), and JVM startup time is brutal. You'll notice the Java is heavily optimized. FYI -- YARV is faster than PHP. As an aside, Javascript is also dog slow, but I'd wager you use that.
I'm not the one coming off as an idiot here, CAPSLOCK ARE CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL.
You are not listening. I do not use Ruby. I use Perl and Python, given that I'm a systems administrator.
Your uninformed bullshit was an explicit reference to Twitter, as it's apparent that you don't know anything about there internals or why performance was crap. Pointing out facts to you is not a tantrum.
Go back to your "real" language and with its ripped-off Perl mysql_escape_string vs. mysql_real_escape string. Do try learning something new every now and then, though. Different paradigms make you a better developer.
You also saw Scala, among other things. If you saw "ruby ruby ruby ruby" it's because you spouted uninformed bullshit, and though I'm not a Rubyist, you could at least get it right.
If you actually bothered to read the rest of the reply, you'd see why Ruby was not the problem, though I admit that performance is not one of Ruby's strong points.
Not that you're going to change your mind, no matter what sites are running Ruby (I'll add GitHub and Penny Arcade to that list).
Don't make me a strawman. I am not part of the Ruby community, but I'm not a rabid fucking PHP fanboy either (you).
I can, though, have my cake and eat it, too. The simple fact is that Twitter suffered from NIH and implemented a half-assed homegrown queue and state machine that they didn't significantly update for years. They did not even try JRuby or rewriting -- an employee rewrote in in Scala for the hell of it and it performed better. Notably, large parts of Twitter are still using Rails, just not that one.
You're looking for an excuse to hate Ruby, and I don't really know why. It's a tool. It may have been the right tool, it may have been the wrong tool, but Twitter didn't even try. Scribd? Hulu? Yellowpages? They don't scale? Sure, not as many sites run Rails as PHP, but don't blame the language for shoddy craftsmanship (Twitter's event stack).
It's not going to die as quickly as you think it will, and even if it does, it's virtually guaranteed to be something like ASP MVC or Django which takes its place.
See this and leave off your trolling. Ruby has its problems, and performance is one of them, but scaling is not so long as you don't re-invent shitty event systems yourself (like Twitter did).
Hellhole is relative. By your definition, probably. Yes, they had secret police and a fairly oppressive government. They also had sanitation facilities, power, and other infrastructure which we bombed out upon invasion. They had competent public servants with decades of experience who we promptly declared criminals when we outlawed The B'aath party. Employment rates were higher before the invasion. While this may turn out for them in the end, it's far from decided, and as it stands, they're worse off by every measurable economic metric. GDP is rather an unfair comparison unless you compare it to pre-sanction levels, and using numbers from 2003 (brutal sanctions, Iraq couldn't sell oil, just starting to recover from the global recession in 2001-ish) is utterly disingenuous, not that you probably care.
Please explain how Hannibal handled a nonexistent entity (the Roman Empire). It was the Roman Republic. He spent 15 years in Italy, and was unable to come to a decisive finish due to Carthaginian authorities diverting resources to Iberia and Roman control of the sea (preventing Hannibal from getting siege equipment that would let him take major cities), combined with trouble at home (Numidia specifically). Initial success (including what is possibly the most crushing defeat in military history for the Romans), left to languish with limited manpower, dwindling public support in Italy, and multiple fronts from the home government. The Romans (Fabius Maximus) took to a strategy of harassment and delay without any open engagements. Sound familiar? It's an oft-repeated story, yet somehow people convince themselves that "quick, decisive" wars will automatically "shock and awe" the native populace like life is a video game.
As an aside, the Punic wars had fuck-all to do with "tyranny and oppression." They were purely power struggles, with neither side being particularly virtuous. Unless I'm mistaken, "tyranny and oppression" can also be dealt with through other means (British India being a notable example, though there are others historically). Most of the time, dealing with "tyranny and oppression" through force leads to another radical in power when the "force" isn't pressing anymore.
Or IPcop, pfSense, m0n0wall, Shorewall, etc. Why? Because they're not appliances.