I assume it's because they want to be able to shuffle the functions these servers are serving while keeping the name.
This is an interesting point. I will usually give host names that give location plus an amusing name that's easy to remember - and then create DNS aliases to correspond to the functions. mail.mycorp.local, mail2.mycorp.local, citrix-farm1.mycorp.local, citrix-farm2.mycorp.local, citrix-redir.mycorp.local, navision.mycorp.local, backups.mycorp.local, dns-ohio.mycorp.local, dns-oregon.mycorp.local, files-ohio.mycorp.local, etc.
This way, I can shuffle functions between machines, consolidate apps, migrate apps to new machines, or bring up a replacement/backup server to cover a catastrophic server failure - without changing anything on any client. It helps for admin, too - Need to RDP into a server because appX has issues? RDP to appX.mycorp.local, you'll always end up on the right machine.
And never, ever name your machines for the company - you never know when that gets bought/sold/merged/rebranded/renamed. That one's bit me more than a couple times. Especially when it was a contentious merger and the "winning" management want all traces of the old name removed.
It looks to me like the inner walls may have eroded/cracked and let exhaust gases into the structure and those gases blew out the external wall sections on the slope.
It seems logical that the best approach is to write the speed critical portions in C and the (G)UI in a HLL - each is best suited for the task.
As a VB.NET programmer building business automation apps for a living, I can't imagine building a (G)UI in a LLL. Not that I wouldn't appreciate the exercise, but the demands of the business environment won't allow it. Not just for the initial build but for the inevitable stream of change requests that will follow. Drag/Drop/Done is the name of the game.
But as a hobbyist microcontroller programmer, well, there's no such thing as bloat in that space - you can't do it!
If I was writing some image manipulation software, all the actual processing would most certainly be in C if not straight assembly for the very most critical parts. But the Load/Save/View/whatever parts, I'll do in VB!
Because it makes the algorithms for splitting up work simpler? Or not, if you have a thread to manage and/or pre/post process the workloads of two worker threads, which is common.
Buy a new drive, swap the board, and return your "new" drive under warranty. Effectively the same thing as getting a replacement from WD.
And I agree with you about WD. I don't touch them. I'm a Quantum...errr...Maxtor...errr....Seagate guy myself. (But I've liked Seatgate all long, too, so I'm OK with it).
Gee I had this idea about 20 years ago, & I suspect many readers here also had a similar sense of deja vu when they read this! Oh well, more power to them... Building an anti-gravity hovercraft is a good idea!
1) It's probably more cost-effective and "greener" to let your existing incandescent lights burn out before replacing them than to incur the environmental and economic costs of CFL manufacturing, transport, packaging, etc. Given the simplicity of an incandescent bulb (wire in a bulb) vs. the many parts of a CFL ballast (transformers, electroncs, interconnects, PCB, etc and what's required to produce each), the environmental impact of CFL manufacture has to be much greater than that of incandescents.
2) It's great that a CFL blub can last 10,000 hours (or whatever) but if that ballast gives up part way through and you have to replace the bulb, you've probably wasted any gain over an incandescent - both economically and environmentally. I've had a couple quit working and I currently have another that emits a high-frequency whine (it got relegated to porch-light duty).
Hence, I'm waiting for widespread availability of LED-based lighting. I see CFL's as a stop-gap measure. I have been buying them for a few years but only to replace burned out lights or in new fixtures. Plus, LED's provide good dimmability, which can save even more power.
I'm sure someone is going to mod me for flamebait, but I never understand the people who insist Apple is the greatest company of the fan of the planet when there is plenty of proof that Apple is a corporation (for better or worse) on par with most corporations. I'm sure someone is going to mod me for flamebait, but I never understand the zealots who insist religion/sports team/celebrity is the greatest religion/sports team/celebrity of the fan of the planet when there is plenty of proof that religion/sports team/celebrity is a religion/sports team/celebrity (for better or worse) on par with most religions/sports teams/celebrities.
Slashdot Mirror
You know you've arrived when your hat's gone to plaid.
Once they finish working this out, I would really be interested if someone manages to reproduce a working version.
You could build a Beowulf cluster of them!
I assume it's because they want to be able to shuffle the functions these servers are serving while keeping the name.
This is an interesting point. I will usually give host names that give location plus an amusing name that's easy to remember - and then create DNS aliases to correspond to the functions. mail.mycorp.local, mail2.mycorp.local, citrix-farm1.mycorp.local, citrix-farm2.mycorp.local, citrix-redir.mycorp.local, navision.mycorp.local, backups.mycorp.local, dns-ohio.mycorp.local, dns-oregon.mycorp.local, files-ohio.mycorp.local, etc. This way, I can shuffle functions between machines, consolidate apps, migrate apps to new machines, or bring up a replacement/backup server to cover a catastrophic server failure - without changing anything on any client. It helps for admin, too - Need to RDP into a server because appX has issues? RDP to appX.mycorp.local, you'll always end up on the right machine. And never, ever name your machines for the company - you never know when that gets bought/sold/merged/rebranded/renamed. That one's bit me more than a couple times. Especially when it was a contentious merger and the "winning" management want all traces of the old name removed.
Excellent, well-thought post. You must be new here.
Or just remain friendless, brainless, helpless, hopeless... and unemployed in Greenland!
It looks to me like the inner walls may have eroded/cracked and let exhaust gases into the structure and those gases blew out the external wall sections on the slope.
Ref: http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts124/080601pad/damage.html
Call the BSA on TJX.
That'll probably cost them plenty and the guy will get a reward for the tip!
Check out the TV show Connections... http://www.amazon.com/Connections-2-5-DVD-set/dp/B0000DIZSF
Math License not required or necessary: http://www.dilbert.com/fast/2008-05-08/
It's a little slow but, so far, it has output the following characters for me:
S e r v N o t R s p n d i g
...for Word Perfect 5.2
It seems logical that the best approach is to write the speed critical portions in C and the (G)UI in a HLL - each is best suited for the task.
As a VB.NET programmer building business automation apps for a living, I can't imagine building a (G)UI in a LLL. Not that I wouldn't appreciate the exercise, but the demands of the business environment won't allow it. Not just for the initial build but for the inevitable stream of change requests that will follow. Drag/Drop/Done is the name of the game.
But as a hobbyist microcontroller programmer, well, there's no such thing as bloat in that space - you can't do it!
If I was writing some image manipulation software, all the actual processing would most certainly be in C if not straight assembly for the very most critical parts. But the Load/Save/View/whatever parts, I'll do in VB!
A orbjhys cluster of these...
Buy a new drive, swap the board, and return your "new" drive under warranty. Effectively the same thing as getting a replacement from WD. And I agree with you about WD. I don't touch them. I'm a Quantum...errr...Maxtor...errr....Seagate guy myself. (But I've liked Seatgate all long, too, so I'm OK with it).
These fit fine in my 63.5mm drive bays.
The cake is a lie.
Actually, in Soviet Russia, the parallel universe find a door to YOU!
OK, here's your chance again - GO!
"ICANN will fix everything"
1) It's probably more cost-effective and "greener" to let your existing incandescent lights burn out before replacing them than to incur the environmental and economic costs of CFL manufacturing, transport, packaging, etc. Given the simplicity of an incandescent bulb (wire in a bulb) vs. the many parts of a CFL ballast (transformers, electroncs, interconnects, PCB, etc and what's required to produce each), the environmental impact of CFL manufacture has to be much greater than that of incandescents. 2) It's great that a CFL blub can last 10,000 hours (or whatever) but if that ballast gives up part way through and you have to replace the bulb, you've probably wasted any gain over an incandescent - both economically and environmentally. I've had a couple quit working and I currently have another that emits a high-frequency whine (it got relegated to porch-light duty). Hence, I'm waiting for widespread availability of LED-based lighting. I see CFL's as a stop-gap measure. I have been buying them for a few years but only to replace burned out lights or in new fixtures. Plus, LED's provide good dimmability, which can save even more power.
Fixed that for you.