I would seriously love having a second chamber consisting of a random selection. That help keep tabs on the first chamber without getting everything entirely stuck.
With a chassis like that , you'll probably end up just spreading the heat through your entire case instead of directing heat away from CPU, HD etc.
What exactly do you think the fans do? Hint: spreading the heat around is exactly you want to do. Unless you want to keep the CPU cooler than ambient, but then fans are not going to work either.
That still does not change the fact that there is a temperature gradient. In the real world. And I am somewhat amazed that two moderators think otherwise.
The system is not closed. One end is being heated, the other end cooled. Therefore there is a temperature gradient. Perhaps someone else needs to learn simple thermodynamics.
For some of the big zones -.com - I have heard that DNSSEC can make it take a very long time to come up after a change in zone contents. That's sort of having to wait for fsck to complete on a 500gigabyte disk every time you want to change a file in the filesystem.
That's a myth spread (mostly) by VeriSign. In reality, the.de zone (which is about as large as.com) was signed in a few hours on a workstation a few years back. CPU speed is growing way faster than the number of domains these days, and a few hours are not a problem compared to propagation delays you face anyway when changing.com.
Reality is that DNSSEC doesn't let VeriSign make more money off each second-level domain. They want DNSSEC changed so they can turn it on and off for each second-level domain. That way they get to charge everyone again. Of course they don't say that out loud; instead they claim performance requires that. Search for DNSSEC opt-in if you want to know more.
You obviously have no concept of AC and DC electricity. Its not just a matter of stepping voltages, its also a matter of line losses and safety. High DC voltages are much more dangerous than similar AC voltages. On top of this, the line losses would make long-range transmission of DC power impractical.
You are living in the 90's. DC-DC conversion is easier these days for voltages less than tens of kV. It is rapidly becoming practical even for the highest voltages. Power electronics are changing everything.
Switched transformers are getting popular already. Soon they'll be cheaper all the time, not just most of the time. Switched transformers would be simpler if they didn't have to start out with AC. So yes, I am saying we should toss out all those power-hungry inefficient wall-warts.
240V is pretty pathetic at making arcs. The easiest solution to the danger problem is to deliver one voltage to the house, which is then converted by power electronics to something like 50V. Only a few outlets for stoves, vacuum cleaners, and electric kettles would have a higher voltage.
If you really wanted you could make "almost-DC" with a brief break a few times a second.
It already happened. Old-fashioned light bulbs are still running 50 Hz AC. Those bulbs would run just as well on DC. Everything else is either converting to DC or switching much faster than 50 Hz.
It's much easier to regulate DC with power electronics. AC was needed back when the only way to change voltage was using a transformer. Now it is obsolete.
A better prefetching mechanism would help greatly for typical use,
That prefetching mechanism cannot be on the drive. The drive does not know whether a sector contains metadata, database locks, or video. Of course the drive can try to figure it out, but doing so would require vast amounts of CPU power and memory. Not something you want on a hard drive.
maybe have the drive read the entire track and put it into the buffer (and move the head to the next track) so the next access doesn't have to wait for data on said track to 'line up' again.
This is so last millenium. All disks do it already. The rest of the ideas have been proposed before. Some of them have even been implemented.
An intelligent pre-buffering system to keep the 16MB buffer full of anticipated data would help the drives perform as well as 7200 RPM drives
Err no. At least not for reads. 16MB of buffer is not even half a second at full transfer speed. Besides, hard drive cache is at the wrong end of the cable. It is much better and cheaper to add those 16MB to the main memory. Perhaps if the cache was a few gigabytes, it might make a difference. It would still only cover a few percent of the drive, so the effect would most likely not be all that impressive.
16MB battery-backed write cache is a great help for synchronous writes though. Without the battery it is mostly useless if you care about your data: asynchronous writes are again much better kept in host memory than in a disk buffer. And synchronous writes have no use for cache that might get erased anytime, by definition.
Slashdot Mirror
Mules don't breed. They don't seem to be dying out.
The TTT also had another character fall down to his death, yet survive in the end. I wonder who it will be in RotK.
Oh. I am so innocent.
Could they mean biot?
I would seriously love having a second chamber consisting of a random selection. That help keep tabs on the first chamber without getting everything entirely stuck.
Thank you, now you can prove that you voted the way I want. Here's your cheque.
WebDAV is a great replacement for FTP, actually. I don't see why you think otherwise.
Because larger majorities are rejecting the other candidates?
Do you really think anyone not liking XEmacs has a chance? There are already rallies planned and angry letters written. Just you wait.
Let us make a support group
What exactly do you think the fans do? Hint: spreading the heat around is exactly you want to do. Unless you want to keep the CPU cooler than ambient, but then fans are not going to work either.
That still does not change the fact that there is a temperature gradient. In the real world. And I am somewhat amazed that two moderators think otherwise.
The system is not closed. One end is being heated, the other end cooled. Therefore there is a temperature gradient. Perhaps someone else needs to learn simple thermodynamics.
DNS can be easily and efficiently changed on the wire. Cisco and other vendors sell boxes which are very good at it.
That's a myth spread (mostly) by VeriSign. In reality, the .de zone (which is about as large as .com) was signed in a few hours on a workstation a few years back. CPU speed is growing way faster than the number of domains these days, and a few hours are not a problem compared to propagation delays you face anyway when changing .com.
Reality is that DNSSEC doesn't let VeriSign make more money off each second-level domain. They want DNSSEC changed so they can turn it on and off for each second-level domain. That way they get to charge everyone again. Of course they don't say that out loud; instead they claim performance requires that. Search for DNSSEC opt-in if you want to know more.
An AC transformer is a whole lot of copper wire and a metal core. A DC "transformer" is just another cheap IC.
ereuter said it best
DC is more efficient. I will let the reader decide who has no concept of AC and DC electricity.
In a pure DC system you would never convert back and forth. So there is no problem.
You are living in the 90's. DC-DC conversion is easier these days for voltages less than tens of kV. It is rapidly becoming practical even for the highest voltages. Power electronics are changing everything.
Switched transformers are getting popular already. Soon they'll be cheaper all the time, not just most of the time. Switched transformers would be simpler if they didn't have to start out with AC. So yes, I am saying we should toss out all those power-hungry inefficient wall-warts.
If you really wanted you could make "almost-DC" with a brief break a few times a second.
It already happened. Old-fashioned light bulbs are still running 50 Hz AC. Those bulbs would run just as well on DC. Everything else is either converting to DC or switching much faster than 50 Hz.
It's much easier to regulate DC with power electronics. AC was needed back when the only way to change voltage was using a transformer. Now it is obsolete.
That prefetching mechanism cannot be on the drive. The drive does not know whether a sector contains metadata, database locks, or video. Of course the drive can try to figure it out, but doing so would require vast amounts of CPU power and memory. Not something you want on a hard drive.
maybe have the drive read the entire track and put it into the buffer (and move the head to the next track) so the next access doesn't have to wait for data on said track to 'line up' again.
This is so last millenium. All disks do it already. The rest of the ideas have been proposed before. Some of them have even been implemented.
Err no. At least not for reads. 16MB of buffer is not even half a second at full transfer speed. Besides, hard drive cache is at the wrong end of the cable. It is much better and cheaper to add those 16MB to the main memory. Perhaps if the cache was a few gigabytes, it might make a difference. It would still only cover a few percent of the drive, so the effect would most likely not be all that impressive.
16MB battery-backed write cache is a great help for synchronous writes though. Without the battery it is mostly useless if you care about your data: asynchronous writes are again much better kept in host memory than in a disk buffer. And synchronous writes have no use for cache that might get erased anytime, by definition.