naw, _they_ are squeezing through a single b channel for updates and stuff, easily saturated I'm sure. Hell I've saturated our T1 before, oh wait my co-lo customers read this, no, I, uh, yeah the switch limits my bandwidth, yeah, that's it, uh, yeah.
I believe they could easily make a proffit from the effects of slashdot and not be requested to change the top level domain. Now if they sold stuff directly from the site then they should change, but who's to say they have to anymore, the.org rules aren't in effect much anymore, but if they did start selling stuff directly from the site I'm sure the other consequenses from the Slashdot community would be worse than top level domain disputes.
Wow, wonder what it must feel like to have a community.....
There's a good trend already, Hemos making the time to make a comment, hopefully he/they will have more time to do things like this more often. Love to see the ops down in the trenches.
Good to see there was no AOL involved. Now you might have some free time to do some vacationing. Maybee come up to the great Northwest, we'd love to have ya up here, hell, we've got room for ya, stay you could stay with us for a few days. Come to a Lan Party, go do the Seattle thing, lot's of neat stuff going on around here (we'd stay away from Redmond though.)
In all seriousness it's not the buss speeds that are really killing us for the most part (true a faster bus helps, but a pinto can only go so fast, even on the Utah Salt Flats.) Still the big slow down is that damned platter and head moving all over the place, which actually does a pretty good job considering the age of the base technology. One thing that really hurts us is fragmentation, people need to defrag, people don't realize how much this really helps. And yes, 5% fragmentation is real bad, think about it, you really only use a small percentage of your drive (depending on your size and habits) and that small percentage that is fragmented is in the most used part of the drive, so that head searching all over the place for stuff you use constatly really hurts. One thing that's been a good move is more chache on the drives. Then there's the cool move by quantum, the solid hard drives, -real- expensive, but damned neat, last I remember it was some tens of thousands per gig, but oh so fast. According to their site they seem to be up to 3.2 gig now (no price listed of course) so you could actually use these for something cool, no raid needed I'm sure, but wonder what it would do on a raid.....
I tried one of those Promise cards "waybackintheday"(tm) when Win95 was still the standard for me and the cards as ultra33 just came out. I bought one because I had an abundance of 1.2gig ide drives just sitting around and I wanted to use as many of them as possible and I hated puting a bunch of drives on the same cable. First, it was pretty finicky as to what would fit where, but I figured it all out and things ran, well for a while. After a few weeks I started getting protection errors constantly, yeah usually on startup, but in win(whatever) you restart a lot, so it was a pretty big annoyance. So I ended up returning it and then just relied on scsi for large numbers of drives.
Something else I had wondered about, would it be possible to have a small adapter type of thing to put a ide drive on a scsi chain, now there you would have something as long as it was pretty low priced. I do think it would be feasable and it would solve the problem. All it would take would be some kind of translation and an autodetecting chipset, it should work real well in an external case. It's something I've been thinking about since my mac days back in school, we had these macs with these little 200mb drives and our pc's over there with their 800mb drives that cost less. I always thought it just made sense, but no one in the industry would want to do it I'm sure.
Well there's the IRQ holders / PCI steering thing for using multiple devices on a single IRQ, I've got a Matrox Millenium sharing IRQ3 with my Yamaha sound card and a TNT sharing with my PS2 mouse and things work fine. An yes I am using windows on my game computer with multiple monitors and the only trouble I can see with the IRQ sharing seems to be when I disable the second monitor the mouse quits uintill a restart, but that wouldn't be a problem if I never had to disable the second monitor, but Q3 seems to not like the dual situation.
Why is it that no one ever gives credit to Berkley Software for GEOS. Yeah it ran on the Commodore 64, but it was a full gui with built in word processor, drawing, and a bunch of other stuff. It never really went too far, but it was great for the time on common hardware (everyone had a c64!)
on the last part of that I can argue that point as I imagine it is taken out of context. It probably referrs to reliability rather than speed. For something small, say a name server for a small group of web servers, which needs to be pretty damned solid (it does no good to have a web server running if it can't be found as I have learned a few times the hard way) I could understand forgoing speed for stability. I don't think I would go so far as to run a 386, but a low end 486 does a whole lot in the server arena and from my experience the are often more stable than most PII's, be it actually more stable or just not as affected by heat, if I don't have to deal with it I see it as being more stable.
For the real argument though, SCSI speed isn't the only factor to the argument, again stability is the key there. Anyone that has run with both will usually tell you that the error rate on a scsi drive is much less than ide, for a couple of reasons.
First, since like what was talked above, the processor handles much more of the i/o of ide than scsi. With this in mind you must remember that processors constantly make mistakes that are cought by the os and resolved before probelms arise (some os's do this better than others, hint hint) so when an ide job is being handled by the processor and an error occurs that is not cought by the os then this error is passed on to the drive. The more that is being handled by the processor the more errors can be passed along to it.
Second, current ide standard is udma, which is at the edge of what is capable through the aging hardware specification. This in mind, would you want to rely on an old technology pushed to it's limit. no.
Third, multiple drives, most good servers don't have one hard drive and one cd rom and call it good. Most will have a dedicated boot and system drive, another drive for data (be it web, ftp, or local file service,) add to that some type of backup drive and the defacto cd rom and you've filled up some ide ports, not to mention that you have 2 on each port running master and slave, which I don't care what anyone tells you it does pose problems besides speed.
So there you go, 3 real good reasons not to go for IDE, without going into speed issues. That is if you can affford it.
win95 will "run" in 4 mb in a restricted mode, not quite safe mode, but almost as bad. I only know because I took out the memory card on my old Toshiba T1900c and started up the computer, it has 4 on board and lo and behold, windows did start up, not happily, but it did start up. I used it for a couple of years through college and now it sits in the corner running Personal Web Server (and getting restarted before the 47 days run out.) I do have to say though, for a win95 install it was extremely stable as I can't recall much of any problems that I would blame the os for, but it sure wasn't zippy. As I recall it took some 3-5 minutes to start up (depending on if it had to log into the network if the net card was in,) I'm sure it takes much less time to get linux and then X up on something like this. Well anyway, I guess there's always room for argument in the computer world, I would fear the alternative.
well, I can give you 3 of the 4. Imagine being able to gain compleete control of an NT workstation, mouse included, from any java capable web browser. I've just started using Remotely Anywhere for NT and it works extrememly well to do remote access for the things you described, although it is pretty far from an X window. I get stuck using NT for a few machines at work and have recently come to rely on Remotely Anywhere to do my off site work for the NT boxes, true I can do stuff by command line for some stuff in NT, but I already have a problem trying to use LS in a dos box (doesn't work, I almost set up ls.bat in the windows directory, I'm sure you can figure out what it's function would be) and I'd hate to complicate things between the 2 any more than I already end up doing.
Anyway, I'm definatly not saying that this can replace X in any way, but I just went to step up to the challenge, 3 out of 4 ain't bad is it?
It's not quite that, it's X percent of the users on a givensystem * Y percent of the users that got infected * Z percent of the users that were affected by the infection. Comes out to a small number usually unless the virus spreads and infects an ap that all people in a given environment either use by choice or by rule and share documents from the particular ap and the virus doesn't take affect instantly, then it can bring down a whole segment of a system that uses the same system. Although, if there were a few different systems going on between users doing the same work just for variety sake then your support team must multiply by the number differces in the different systems running. This becomes a horrible nightmare real fast. I wish I could see a real solution to the scenario. Every solution I can come up with has serious drawbacks, I do belive there is no magic fix yet. damn and I do with there was one!
Slashdot Mirror
naw, _they_ are squeezing through a single b channel for updates and stuff, easily saturated I'm sure. Hell I've saturated our T1 before, oh wait my co-lo customers read this, no, I, uh, yeah the switch limits my bandwidth, yeah, that's it, uh, yeah.
matguy
Net. Admin.
I believe they could easily make a proffit from the effects of slashdot and not be requested to change the top level domain. Now if they sold stuff directly from the site then they should change, but who's to say they have to anymore, the .org rules aren't in effect much anymore, but if they did start selling stuff directly from the site I'm sure the other consequenses from the Slashdot community would be worse than top level domain disputes.
Wow, wonder what it must feel like to have a community.....
matguy
Net. Admin.
I suppose you steal Cable too.
matguy
Net. Admin.
Does just around your ankles count?
matguy
Net. Admin.
It's only old to you because it didn't happen to you.
matguy
Net. Admin.
There's a good trend already, Hemos making the time to make a comment, hopefully he/they will have more time to do things like this more often. Love to see the ops down in the trenches.
matguy
Net. Admin.
oh, I don't know, now it's the underdog making out big, that's the American Story.
matguy
Net. Admin.
Good to see there was no AOL involved. Now you might have some free time to do some vacationing. Maybee come up to the great Northwest, we'd love to have ya up here, hell, we've got room for ya, stay you could stay with us for a few days. Come to a Lan Party, go do the Seattle thing, lot's of neat stuff going on around here (we'd stay away from Redmond though.)
matguy
Net. Admin.
So now no Yahoo in libraries, that's what we need.
matguy
Net. Admin.
I was thinking about getting one of these, this seems to be a good step in them supporting linux a little better.
matguy
Net. Admin.
ok, so I should read further down before I post, doe!
matguy
Net. Admin.
In all seriousness it's not the buss speeds that are really killing us for the most part (true a faster bus helps, but a pinto can only go so fast, even on the Utah Salt Flats.) Still the big slow down is that damned platter and head moving all over the place, which actually does a pretty good job considering the age of the base technology. One thing that really hurts us is fragmentation, people need to defrag, people don't realize how much this really helps. And yes, 5% fragmentation is real bad, think about it, you really only use a small percentage of your drive (depending on your size and habits) and that small percentage that is fragmented is in the most used part of the drive, so that head searching all over the place for stuff you use constatly really hurts. One thing that's been a good move is more chache on the drives. Then there's the cool move by quantum, the solid hard drives, -real- expensive, but damned neat, last I remember it was some tens of thousands per gig, but oh so fast. According to their site they seem to be up to 3.2 gig now (no price listed of course) so you could actually use these for something cool, no raid needed I'm sure, but wonder what it would do on a raid.....
matguy
Net. Admin.
I tried one of those Promise cards "waybackintheday"(tm) when Win95 was still the standard for me and the cards as ultra33 just came out. I bought one because I had an abundance of 1.2gig ide drives just sitting around and I wanted to use as many of them as possible and I hated puting a bunch of drives on the same cable. First, it was pretty finicky as to what would fit where, but I figured it all out and things ran, well for a while. After a few weeks I started getting protection errors constantly, yeah usually on startup, but in win(whatever) you restart a lot, so it was a pretty big annoyance. So I ended up returning it and then just relied on scsi for large numbers of drives.
Something else I had wondered about, would it be possible to have a small adapter type of thing to put a ide drive on a scsi chain, now there you would have something as long as it was pretty low priced. I do think it would be feasable and it would solve the problem. All it would take would be some kind of translation and an autodetecting chipset, it should work real well in an external case. It's something I've been thinking about since my mac days back in school, we had these macs with these little 200mb drives and our pc's over there with their 800mb drives that cost less. I always thought it just made sense, but no one in the industry would want to do it I'm sure.
matguy
Net. Admin.
Well there's the IRQ holders / PCI steering thing for using multiple devices on a single IRQ, I've got a Matrox Millenium sharing IRQ3 with my Yamaha sound card and a TNT sharing with my PS2 mouse and things work fine. An yes I am using windows on my game computer with multiple monitors and the only trouble I can see with the IRQ sharing seems to be when I disable the second monitor the mouse quits uintill a restart, but that wouldn't be a problem if I never had to disable the second monitor, but Q3 seems to not like the dual situation.
matguy
Net. Admin.
Watch AOL will probably buy it, they've been buying everything else.
matguy
Net. Admin.
it also takes a whole bunch of processor, well it did on our PII300 and rendered a p200 almost unusable, compleetly hogging the whole procesor.
matguy
Net. Admin.
Why is it that no one ever gives credit to Berkley Software for GEOS. Yeah it ran on the Commodore 64, but it was a full gui with built in word processor, drawing, and a bunch of other stuff. It never really went too far, but it was great for the time on common hardware (everyone had a c64!)
matguy
Net. Admin.
on the last part of that I can argue that point as I imagine it is taken out of context. It probably referrs to reliability rather than speed. For something small, say a name server for a small group of web servers, which needs to be pretty damned solid (it does no good to have a web server running if it can't be found as I have learned a few times the hard way) I could understand forgoing speed for stability. I don't think I would go so far as to run a 386, but a low end 486 does a whole lot in the server arena and from my experience the are often more stable than most PII's, be it actually more stable or just not as affected by heat, if I don't have to deal with it I see it as being more stable.
For the real argument though, SCSI speed isn't the only factor to the argument, again stability is the key there. Anyone that has run with both will usually tell you that the error rate on a scsi drive is much less than ide, for a couple of reasons.
First, since like what was talked above, the processor handles much more of the i/o of ide than scsi. With this in mind you must remember that processors constantly make mistakes that are cought by the os and resolved before probelms arise (some os's do this better than others, hint hint) so when an ide job is being handled by the processor and an error occurs that is not cought by the os then this error is passed on to the drive. The more that is being handled by the processor the more errors can be passed along to it.
Second, current ide standard is udma, which is at the edge of what is capable through the aging hardware specification. This in mind, would you want to rely on an old technology pushed to it's limit. no.
Third, multiple drives, most good servers don't have one hard drive and one cd rom and call it good. Most will have a dedicated boot and system drive, another drive for data (be it web, ftp, or local file service,) add to that some type of backup drive and the defacto cd rom and you've filled up some ide ports, not to mention that you have 2 on each port running master and slave, which I don't care what anyone tells you it does pose problems besides speed.
So there you go, 3 real good reasons not to go for IDE, without going into speed issues. That is if you can affford it.
matguy
Net. Admin.
I should check that out, Remotely anywhere is some $100, free is much better.
matguy
Net. Admin.
win95 will "run" in 4 mb in a restricted mode, not quite safe mode, but almost as bad. I only know because I took out the memory card on my old Toshiba T1900c and started up the computer, it has 4 on board and lo and behold, windows did start up, not happily, but it did start up. I used it for a couple of years through college and now it sits in the corner running Personal Web Server (and getting restarted before the 47 days run out.) I do have to say though, for a win95 install it was extremely stable as I can't recall much of any problems that I would blame the os for, but it sure wasn't zippy. As I recall it took some 3-5 minutes to start up (depending on if it had to log into the network if the net card was in,) I'm sure it takes much less time to get linux and then X up on something like this. Well anyway, I guess there's always room for argument in the computer world, I would fear the alternative.
matguy
Net. Admin.
well, I can give you 3 of the 4. Imagine being able to gain compleete control of an NT workstation, mouse included, from any java capable web browser. I've just started using Remotely Anywhere for NT and it works extrememly well to do remote access for the things you described, although it is pretty far from an X window. I get stuck using NT for a few machines at work and have recently come to rely on Remotely Anywhere to do my off site work for the NT boxes, true I can do stuff by command line for some stuff in NT, but I already have a problem trying to use LS in a dos box (doesn't work, I almost set up ls.bat in the windows directory, I'm sure you can figure out what it's function would be) and I'd hate to complicate things between the 2 any more than I already end up doing.
Anyway, I'm definatly not saying that this can replace X in any way, but I just went to step up to the challenge, 3 out of 4 ain't bad is it?
matguy
Net. Admin.
only for question #19 if for noothing else, if you don't get it you probably never will.
matguy
Net. Admin.
the link you give seems to be somewhat flawed, try this one http://tnt.turne r.com/movies/tntoriginals/pirates/img/enter-bg.jpg
matguy
Net. Admin.
How about some open module sources so that users can compile in their own environment.
As good of a card as the live is it sure has a lot of driver issues, probably the main reason I haven't gotten one yet.
matguy
Net. Admin.
It's not quite that, it's X percent of the users on a givensystem * Y percent of the users that got infected * Z percent of the users that were affected by the infection. Comes out to a small number usually unless the virus spreads and infects an ap that all people in a given environment either use by choice or by rule and share documents from the particular ap and the virus doesn't take affect instantly, then it can bring down a whole segment of a system that uses the same system. Although, if there were a few different systems going on between users doing the same work just for variety sake then your support team must multiply by the number differces in the different systems running. This becomes a horrible nightmare real fast. I wish I could see a real solution to the scenario. Every solution I can come up with has serious drawbacks, I do belive there is no magic fix yet. damn and I do with there was one!
matguy
Net. Admin.